On Jul 10, 2005, at 4:24 PM, Renat Lumpau wrote:
I'm one of the Gentoo maintainers of htdig. We have recently
received a
bug report [1] that may be of interest to you. The bug has to do with
building htdig on AMD64 and necessary -fPIC -DPIC. Please take a look
and advise.
I'm confused.
On Mar 8, 2005, at 6:44 AM, Dan Langille wrote:
If the Pre-Release Checklist has not been done, I have no clues
about LeakTester, checker, purify, gprof. Anyone?
I can vouch that essentially everything in the pre-release checklist
has been done. The utilities you mention are used for finding
Geoff: could you create a release tarball (and maybe create a
document detailed how you generaly do this)
Such a document already exists. It's a little out-of-date (since it's
back in the days before SourceForge), but it's still pretty much
correct:
http://htdig.org/dev/checklist.html
I'd
What's actually the procedure for updating the htdig-website.
If I knew what to do, I could help webmastering the website.
The website runs out of the maindocs directory of CVS. If you change
files in the maindocs CVS, they will be taken up on the website and the
mirrors.
Due to SF.net
On Nov 30, 2004, at 2:32 AM, Claus Larsen wrote:
But now more than 3 months later nothing have happend,
according to the last modified date on
http://www.htdig.org/mirrors.html nothing has happend
since 2004-08-18.
I apologize. Updating the mirror list seems to be one of the tasks/jobs
that has
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
On Jul 22, 2004, at 12:24 PM, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
My understanding, though I may be wrong (Geoff Hutchison could provide
the definitive answer), is that the 3.1.x code base does not include
any extensions or customisations to the Sleepycat Berkeley DB code,
This is correct. Over the 3.1.x
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b6: Scheduled: 31 May 2004.
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
On Nov 17, 2003, at 7:32 PM, Neal Richter wrote:
This part of the code is pretty cheese-whizzy, so attention Geoff!
Any insights? I am assuming that at some point this worked properly.
I *really* don't have much time. I'm attempting to finish my last
chapter by Friday and that's going to take
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Released: 10 Nov 2003.
3.2.0b4: Cancelled.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything added here should have a tracker PR# so
we can be sure
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed as supported.
Systems tested so
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
Begin forwarded message:
From: David Bannon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun Sep 14, 2003 5:38:32 PM America/Chicago
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Geoff Hutchison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [htdig-dev] Current Status as of snapshot 3.2.0b4-20030914
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I try it under
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
as part of your package creates this file.
As I do not use Debian, I cannot give you any more information--only
that it's not an upstream issue.
Cheers,
-Geoff
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu/
---
This SF.Net
big are your databases
exactly? Are your problems limited to htmerge? (In which case, I likely
know the problem, and it's not due to 64-bit addressing.)
-Geoff
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
On Saturday, June 21, 2003, at 09:03 AM, Lachlan Andrew wrote:
have to implement a proper fix before the beta goes out. However, I
don't think I'll have time for that for the next two months :(
Translation: I'm in favour of your checking it in.
Ditto.
-Geoff
I don't think Geoff was saying we *shouldn't* use 2.7.
It's just that we haven't actually *tested* it under 2.7.
If (when :) you can confirm that it still works under 2.8,
Right. Sorry for the confusion. If it works under gcc-2.7, so much the
better!
But IMHO, we should be pushing people towards
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Apply memory leak patches (Neal)
* Check bugs listed in bug-tracker...
* Polish release docs (Geoff)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/12/1742209mode=threadtid=134
Basically, it looks like there's now a GPL'd Java implementation of
what Google has published about their PageRank feature. The current
ht://Dig backlink_factor is a quick-and-dirty hack I put in to try to
get some of the
I'm guessing you mean the scoring in the 3.2 code?
The base score of documents I search for is typically 0.0001, while
the backlink factor is typically 2000. Since these are added, the
weight given to the document itself is approximately zero!
Does anyone know how this came about?
Well, that
1. It works fine with --disable-bigfile and I'd be inclined to leave
it at that for 3.2.0b5. (If people have indexes over 4GB, the I say
eliminating redundancy from the database structure is a higher
priority than enabling big file support...)
So are we saying that for SunOS native cc, we're
On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 12:00 AM, Jim Cole wrote:
the time being. We can always add a FAQ telling people to use
--disable-shared if it comes up a lot.
Or we can continue the hack that I put into the configure scripts to
set --disable-shared as the default on powerpc-*-* targets.
Peter
Sorry I've been AWOL. There was a big grant review this last week and
lots of things were dumped on me.
The problem with make check on SunOS with native cc is the size of
off_t, the size of an offset in a file. This seems to be related to
the --enable-bigfile configure option. Does anyone
Hmm. We need to update copyright information before releasing 3.2.0b5.
1) Files need to have current copyright, especially if they have been
touched since 2001.
2) As per the ht://Dig group decision, the source is now available
under the LGPL.
Thus the COPYING file, as well as the per-file
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
CHECKLIST FOR 3.2.0b5:
* Add more items to checklist :-)
* Must be able to
(a) make check and
(b) index www.htdig.org using robotstxt_name: master-htdig
on all systems listed as supported.
Systems tested so far:
- Mandrake 8.2, gcc 3.2
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, First quarter 2003???
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, First quarter 2003???
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything
That could have its own problems. If they are labelled -1, -2, ...
then phrase searching would have to match *backwards* for negative
numbers. Then if true positions overflowed into negative numbers,
...very negative number, then it is essentially starting from a very
large (unsigned) location.
1. Why do the documentation for external_parser and the comments
before Retriever::got_word both say that the word location must be
in the range 0-1000?
That's a 3.1-ism. The documentation is wrong. Oops.
first word of any *other* entry. Could we add meta information at
successive
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, First quarter 2003???
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dave Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun Feb 9, 2003 9:47:57 PM US/Central
To: Geoff Hutchison [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Formation of the ht://Dig Group
Dear Mr. Hutchison,
My apologies for not replying sooner to your invitation. I got your
mail because I
vars tell me!
I'd guess they're less widely used, but:
bad_querystr
bad_extensions
valid_extensions
server_max_docs can also limit things (as would the robots.txt and
meta-robots tag).
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu
http://www.tedmasterweb.com/htdig/
Always appreciate the feedback...
I think it's looking pretty good overall. It'd be nice to have lists by
category, programs, etc. and I'm sure that's on your TODO list.
Minor nit-picky things. It might not be a bad idea to have letters (with
no links)
I'm now working with this Snapshot, but have the same truble with lex
like jesse
on AIX.
-
lex -L `test -f conf_lexer.lxx || echo './'`conf_lexer.lxx
It shouldn't need to be running flex/lex. The code does have the
appropriately-generated file. Make sure that the conf_lexer.cxx hasn't
Well, I had an oral exam on Thursday, so I've been quite busy the last
few weeks and fortunately things should settle down a bit. (I can't say
I followed much e-mail unless my filters threw it into the Family
mailbox, sorry.)
SHOWSTOPPER:
* Still need thorough testing of the database, with
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, First quarter 2003???
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that everything
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Neal Richter wrote:
What if we had a feature that stripped the querystrs from a URL
contained in bad_querystr rather than rejecting them?
url_rewrite_rules ?
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu
On Monday, February 3, 2003, at 12:48 PM, Gabriele Bartolini wrote:
What kind of problem have you had specifically, Geoff?
At the time, it didn't correctly compile C++ code. While it sounds like
that's fixed, I guess I'm also just trying to say that we have plenty
of OS X testers.
-Geoff
Also, I'm still new to XML so pardon what may be a stupid question,
but, rather than writing your own DTD, would it be possible for us to
borrow the DTD for XHTML and then modify that to meet our needs
(adding our own custom elements)? That way we could include all types
of html in the
Could someone who knows what exact: and hidden: mean please
explain what they are for (and/or document them officially)? I don't
want to break anything while trying to fix the bug.
These are fuzzy algorithms essentially. You could have endings:blah.
You're right that it's undocumented, and
Everything is ok on all Linux on all platforms (i686, Alpha, Sparc);
MacOS x 10.1 still has that problem with shared libraries (as it was
before)
whereas Solaris on a Sparc R220 doesn't go.
Just a note that I've had strange problems with the MacOS X 10.1 node
on the compile farm. Since there
I'm wondering if we couldn't add a String to the Dictionary class and
use that instead of doing a malloc/strcpy everytime.. this function is
called jillions of times.
That's probably a good idea.
I'm also curious as to why not use Knuth's golden ratio hash
function,
it's a well studied
Is there a list of tasks which *must* be completed before the release
of 3.2.0b4/5? If the STATUS file is that list, can I suggest that
some things be classed as not essential (at least defaults.xml, and
preferably most of it)?
The STATUS file is the list, though it's intended to be updated by
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Feb 2003.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Feb 2003.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Feb 2003.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
.
But the item hasn't changed in any substantial way since the previous
discussion of locking (which looks like Sep-2002).
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=2014435
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Feb 2003.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
- Why was regex.h renamed gregex.h in 3.1.6? It seems
to break the configure script, so that it always reports
HAVE_BROKEN_REGEX.
Strange, it wasn't doing that for me, but perhaps that's because I was
using gcc-3.x?
The change was made because certain systems have serious problems
And it only responded with Unable to read configuration file...it did not
return back the .conf file location.
...
Can you please tell me where to fix this.
Yes. You will need to update to htdig-3.1.6.
http://www.htdig.org/where.html
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
Indexing the stems is a good suggestion. It would
certainly give faster searching. If it replaced the
unstemmed inverted file then it would also save on storage
requirements, but it would mean we couldn't search on the
unstemmed version (if that is of concern).
The general strategy used by
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
On Monday, November 25, 2002, at 12:18 PM, Andrea Capiluppi wrote:
i was analyzing htDig, but my problem is that i don't have the sequence
of
the different versions.
If you put together
http://www.htdig.org/RELEASE.html
http://www.htdig.org/dev/htdig-3.2/RELEASE.html
(in reverse
Is the policy to have all possible stemmings, even if they
are non-words, like unrealises? If so, we can really
go to town on the affixes :)
No, and I'd expect that ispell doesn't want them either. Of course many
people have moved away from ispell too...
Is the release still scheduled for 1
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
Hi Ryan,
There's no set position for most free software development. If you'd
like to contribute, great--give what time you can. The mifluz project
per-se doesn't really exist, as the main developer, Loic Dachary, has
moved on to other things.
However, the mifluz project is (and has always
On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 06:43 PM, Lachlan Andrew wrote:
While we're changing Configuration.cc, what do people
think about issuing a warning if an attribute is not
found, rather than silently using the default_value
argument? That would remind developers to add the
attribute to
On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 06:40 PM, Lachlan Andrew wrote:
they are what I was planning to change first. That leaves
lots of changes to documentation and configuration files.
The documentation changes are, of course, a bit tricky. After all, you
can't directly compare attrs.html
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Lachlan Andrew wrote:
Regarding the flags, I can see why it makes sense to store
the information, but it doesn't need to be as a bit-field.
I do think it makes sense to have a bit field. Remember that we're not
just planning a database for HTML documents. Yes, some of
like to do
it.)
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu/
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm
Tungsten T handheld. Power Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl
, I don't remember enough of the Berkeley DB details to
know if that's the only method for comparing keys. If we change it, will
things stay consistent?
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu/
---
This sf.net email
the matches_per_page attribute to something quite high in your
config file, or the matchesperpage form variable:
http://www.htdig.org/attrs.html#matches_per_page
http://www.htdig.org/hts_form.html
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu
Sorry, I've been really busy and haven't had much time to comment on
this.
On Saturday, November 2, 2002, at 08:29 PM, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
How much of this database fragmentation would be due to the fact that
there are records of different lengths, and how much would be due to
updating a
STATUS of ht://Dig branch 3-2-x
RELEASES:
3.2.0b5: Next release, tentatively 1 Dec 2002.
3.2.0b4: In progress -- snapshots called 3.2.0b4 until prerelease.
3.2.0b3: Released: 22 Feb 2001.
3.2.0b2: Released: 11 Apr 2000.
3.2.0b1: Released: 4 Feb 2000.
(Please note that
it? This patch also contains the patches I've submitted
earlier, since I can't find a snapshot which incorporates
them. (I realise that you are very busy...)
I apologize--I think somehow I missed them. I did inspect them tonight
and am integrating them. I *think* they should make this next
On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 02:50 PM, Neal Richter wrote:
It looks to me like the db.words.db is using only a 'key' value, and has
a blank 'value' for each and every key!
Nope. Remember that value as it currently stands is the anchor--if
any. So if your documents don't have anchors
I talked to Neal off-list, so I'd like to clarify as well. I think the
three of us are thinking basically the same thing, but it doesn't help
when we talk about 3.3 or 4.0. So let's talk about how to get 3.2.0b4
out soon.
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Gilles Detillieux wrote:
I guess it comes down
On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 02:27 AM, Brian White wrote:
* 95% of htdocs/attrs.html
I guess I'm not clear on what 95% means. Does this refer to the markup
that you mentioned before?
I still need to bundle up the changes - I was thinking of creating
a patch based on 3.2.0b4 and
I'm going to take two separate issues and separate them for the moment:
1) What changes are needed for a solid 3.2.0 release.
2) The mifluz merge (in a separate e-mail).
Please don't take any of my comments as overly critical or flaming.
You're new to the project and attempting to take on some
1 - 100 of 289 matches
Mail list logo
