to finish
up other projects that have been hanging around, in my case)
--
Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
We're visiting the relatives. Cover us.
--
Mailman-Users
nt looking for it, and couldn't remember which
book it was in...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh
nervously and change t
grade when new betas come out. The
bug you're seeing was fixed long ago. Update to 2.0.1....
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I tried to get a
effective
against isn't...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop
.
This has been hashed over more than once. If you insist on doing it, we
can't stop oyu. But don't expect us to help, make it easy, or say it's okay
when we don't think it is. It's not.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
f is being handled.
But whatever you choose to do, I'd suggest you stop telling the experts how
to do their job, until you learn enough about the nissue you're complaining
about to know why we're doing this in the first place.
Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean it's worth anything.
--
On Thursday, March 29, 2001, at 11:41 AM, alex wetmore wrote:
In the past couple of weeks there have been many more messages
complaining about the spam then spam itself...
yup. and until the spam goes away, that'll continue, too. Which is
another reason to make the spam go away -- because
On Friday, March 30, 2001, at 11:05 AM, Ron Echeverri wrote:
I disagree. Since we can't control spammers, perhaps we should simply
control ourselves, and instead of complaining about the spam, we
should simply delete it. I
If you go home at night and smell gas, do you solve the problem
work with sendmail in my job now, and *I* am still learning
about the bloody program. Don't feel bad.
(grin)
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Some days
is to use DNS to create a round-robin of the outgoing
servers, and then have Mailman server to that dns name.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I tried
On 4/16/01 5:01 PM, "Barry A. Warsaw" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another scenario is that you've cranked up your qrunner process
limits, but not appropriatedly adjusted your qrunner lock lifetime.
Or you haven't changed any of the limits, but the time it takes to send a
single message exceeds
think it's better to leave nomail
to the users, and either remove users or set up a second flag for system
use in disabling users, because otherwise we end up with ambiguous
situations.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTE
On 5/1/01 1:40 PM, Barry A. Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, if I hit the stop button before the page is finished loading,
I can see that the CGI process continues to run for a while and then
it may or may not clear the locks.
That would match something I've been seeing and sorta
On 5/1/01 8:52 PM, Barry A. Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've avoid that because of NFS issues, i.e. if you've got multiple
Mailman installations sharing an NFS partition, the pids aren't
relevant.
If you have that, don't you have chaos anyway? Is the createlink lock style
reliable over
On 5/2/01 11:30 AM, Graham TerMarsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Barry, wanted to thank you muchly for the lengthy description of the
problem and the patch that you provided. I figured that this was probably
what was happening, after having gone through the process of running the
CGIs
On 5/8/01 12:12 PM, Bill Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why? IMO, the List-* headers are excessive and should, at the very least,
be configurable. If I want my list message to carry this info I can
already put it in the footers. Why should I force everyone to scroll past
a page long
On 5/8/01 12:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The List-headers are RFC-compliant. Footers are not.
What RFC says that footers are not allowed?
You know, we have this same argument every few weeks. Barry, can the
FAQ/INSTALL/README/etc be updated with a comment about this so
On 5/8/01 1:48 PM, Clayton, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is the address of the RFC list that pertains to structure and such.
Fair warning though. Have lots of coffee ready.
www.imc.org/rfcs.html#rfc822
Except that's not the RFC involing list-id and list* headers. And RFC822 was
On 5/8/01 3:32 PM, Ashley M. Kirchner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I want to setup multiple servers running (the same) mailman lists.
Before we start building this beast -- why?
Trying to keep the subscriber databases in sync across machines is going to
be problematic. Before we build it,
On 5/8/01 4:01 PM, Ashley M. Kirchner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before we start building this beast -- why?
Load balancing.
I figured, but I wanted to make sure.
I prefer having one server running mailman and having all
the lists on it, however this means that machine will also get hit
On 5/8/01 4:27 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO, the List-* headers are excessive and should, at the very
least, be configurable.
This has been a point of contention on the list and elsewhere. I
disagree.
I'll take a middle ground. If he really feels this is how the list-*
On 5/8/01 4:35 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chuq (official hard-ass of the 2002 summer olympics)
The concept of spandex covered buns at an athletic avent
Especially if they're MY buns. It'd scar some people for life...
--
John David Cole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to keep people from unsubscribing?
Currently there is no direct support for this.
And while I understand there are certain circumstances wher ethis might be
reasonable (for instance, one of my list servers managers department lists
On 5/8/01 5:02 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Especially if they're MY buns. It'd scar some people for life...
I thought I mentioned that _MY_ universe was not capable of
supporting such concepts. Yeesh.
Heh. If you want to scare the children, you can go to www.chuqui.com, and
On 5/8/01 5:01 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good distinction. I still use the default Mailman footer that
points to the list page.
I've decided the default footer isn't quite good enough. And the default
mailman digest header is bad -- I've gotten any number of complaints about
On 5/8/01 5:02 PM, Ashley M. Kirchner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a) NFS
I wouldn't even try.
or b) If mailman has a way of sending a signal out when something changes on
the .db files
No, it doesn't. Doesn't necessarily need to.
What comes to mind with this last option though is,
On 5/8/01 5:22 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've decided the default footer isn't quite good enough.
Your complaint?
Minor ones:
___
sharks mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hockeyfanz.com/mailman/listinfo/sharks
Neither of
On 5/8/01 10:57 PM, David Casamento [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So from what I can tell, my mailing list server is sending out all the dups.
But that doesn't tell you where they're coming from. Who's creating the
duplicates? You? Or someone else? Until you figure that you, you won't
really solve
On 5/8/01 11:09 PM, Bill Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since upgrading my Mailman installation to
2.x these headers have been the direct cause of new tech support calls,
everyone of which costs money.
So solve the real problem -- which is create a FAQ item telling people how
to fix mail
On 5/9/01 1:33 PM, Bill Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OTOH, a strident hack it or take a hike anti-configuration stance (some
of the messages in the archive are downright hostile) actually makes it
harder for me, and others, to migrate towards full 2369 compliance, which
means it ain't
On 5/11/01 8:07 AM, Nigel Metheringham
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This would allow people enough rope to completely hang themselves, and
add a reasonably useful additional feature in.
If this were a web system, I'd be all for it.
But e-mail interacts with other email systems all over the
On 5/12/01 6:52 PM, Ian White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which variables should be changed? It looks like the following could use
some changes:
SMTP_MAX_RCPTS = 500
Between 5 and 10 - that should be set for any mailman installation. 500 is
way too high for reasonable performance.
On 5/12/01 7:20 PM, Tib [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To take another approach, mail out a link to the newsletter rather than the
ENTIRE newsletter to each person. Do the math;
Your math is wrong, though.
if you're mailing out a letter
that's 30k, to 10,000 users. that's gonna be 300 megs of
On 5/12/01 10:43 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) If your messages are getting corrupted, AT ALL, you have far more
serious problems than how fast your system is able to deliver a list
broadcast.
Yeah. TCP guarantees the data is good. You basically can't get corruption
unless
On 5/12/01 10:51 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find this curious. I have MAX_RCPT_TO set to 5, and to broadcast
30 messages to a subscriber base of 1,000 (ie 6,000 spool entries)
through qrunner to the MTA (postfix) on a dual PII-333 takes just
over 6 seconds once started.
On 5/13/01 12:22 AM, Tib [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who has email that does not have web access at the time they get their email?
Not a huge number, but not zero. As wireless mobile becomes more
significant, it'll be a growing issue, not a shrinking one.
True: users who have a bland interest
On 5/13/01 12:44 AM, Roger B.A. Klorese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you expect wireless mobile NOT to have web access? Hell, I use my web
access when mobile much more than my email access.
No, but I expect wireless mobile to have limitations on display -- not to
the level that WAP hoses you
On Sunday, May 20, 2001, at 09:03 PM, Dave Klingler wrote:
Apologies to any Omni employees who read this some day and feel
insulted.
I'll simply say not everyone agrees with Dave, and leave it at that.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
On Thursday, May 31, 2001, at 09:22 PM, Mike T. Gholson wrote:
It doesn't look like sendmail is the greatest MTA for
use with Mailman. What is a good MTA that seems to work
well with Mailman?
Sendmail works fine. But if you're not committed to sendmail, look at
postfix
--
Chuq Von
On Sunday, June 3, 2001, at 11:55 AM, Mike T. Gholson wrote:
On the same note, is there a way to 'mass subscribe' email
addresses to the DIGEST version of the list?
yes. add_members -d file list instead of -n file. It's right there
in the documentation... (add_members --help)
--
Chuq Von
as the messages enter the system...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
To the optimist, the glass is half full.
To the pessimist, the glass is half empty
.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't fallen
asleep yet
"strip all but these mime parts". Any stripped part ought to be replaced with a text part that documents the modification by mailman.
Conceptually, not tough, but since you might need to start ripping apart nested mime-parts...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.co
. Barry, has this ever been added to the
FAQ, so we can simply point to it and not restart this argument again?
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I tried
absolutely must have it, but Lyris isn't
free.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a
message
in the reply. If that exists, bounce it. If not, assume they did
edit it enough, and even if you don't agree iwth how they edited it,
don't worry about it and leave it alone.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes
.
On Wednesday, June 13, 2001, at 07:55 AM, JT wrote:
Equally likely situations: he has *multiple* users too dumb to figure
out how to unsubscribe (sad),
Could you remove all traces of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] from your
system or i will be forced to block your address.
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http
many people feel everyone else owes them whatever they want.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Stress is when you wake up screaming and you realize you haven't
enthusiasm
in 15 years.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties
are largely ceremonial
Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of
Karma to burn off.
--
Mailman-Users
to be...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Shroedinger:
We can never really be sure which side of the road the chicken is on.
It's all a matter of chance. Like
stupid or arrogant when they don't get it)
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I'm really easy to get along with once you
people learn to worship me
to
tweak, and what you ought to hide until they define themselves as
experts.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
To the optimist, the glass is half full
unsubs on
my mail lists, and that was a guy who was trying to make a point and so
unsubsribed me from my own lists. Let's just say he didn't appreciate
the response.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've
under. I'll be back later.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
You know, I Remember When I Used To Speak In Capitals, Too. It's
addictive.
It also encourages
On Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 12:43 PM, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
I think I'm gonna go find a tree to sit under. I'll be back later.
sorry, folks. That was meant to go privately, not to the entire list. I
pushed the wrong button.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
PROTECTED] wrote:
I will not take bull shit and smart emails! Just take me off your email list
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com>
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]> = [EMAIL PROTECTED]> = [EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I'll try
to the users.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Any connection between your reality and mine
is purely coincidental
are proposing cause problems? It's only an issue if we
'put them over the edge', and I don't at all think we should ASSUME we
will. I'm willing to bet most sites will continue to work just fine.
It's osmething that might be useful to survey before making assumptions
and decisions.
--
Chuq Von Rospach
do VERP, since it's now free.
but if you don't want to do the customization for end-users, then yes,
intermittent VERP is fine.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page
that, to encoding the unsub with the
info needed to find the subscribed address automatically. We can put the
URL in there already; that just isn't always good enough. We're talking
about customizing that for each user.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED
into the
conversation midway and don't catch that we've redefined things on them.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Any connection between your reality and mine
is purely
On Friday, June 15, 2001, at 03:26 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
Where then will you put the list submission address?
for the lists I'm talking about, thre is none. These are e-newsletters.
This isn't my mailman system. Sorry if it's not clear. This is my big
server.
--
Chuq Von Rospach
not worth trying to save
someone from themselves.
sigh
of course, we have to remember they'll blame us for it, too.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you
with a properly configured version of
postfix, exim or qmail. This is not a problem with mailman: this is a
design limitation in sendmail that we don't believe will be fixed in the
forseeable future.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
of this...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Any connection between your reality and mine
is purely coincidental
is
useful enough we want people to use it unless they have to turn it off,
we don't want to have to try to convince the people who install stuff
and leave everything defaulted to turn it on.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED
on
the developers list...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties
are largely ceremonial
on TV. Speaking for Barry, I can only
say let's cut this out and get back to talking about mailman
Are we done spraying testosterone all over the mail list yet? Or do we
need another round of proving we're an even bigger expert than you are?
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http
probably not what you meant...
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
How about never? Is never good for you
as typical to see these things in a 30 minute turnaround as a 3 minute.
Or 2 hours. You can reduce the worst of the damage, but these hacks
don't really fix it.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've
, unless it's very,
very important to trap whatever Im trapping.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
I'll try being nicer if you'll try being
smarter
digest subject line, but that's mostly because
digests coerce reply-to (they basically have to. I can't justify
reply-to-nobody, but it's tempting), and that's what usually starts
loops in the first place
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
. Usually on deadline.
Also consider that this might be a very desirable feature on some
lists, limiting the ability of a person to make excessive posts.
that's something for a list admin to decide, not a state counter in a
database.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
are actually fairly
simple. If you want to act like a list mom, know the rules you're
enforcing. And one of those rules is don't do that. rather hard for
them to justify their actions that way, of course (grin)
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
the real economy, the new economy and the false economy...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
To the optimist, the glass is half full.
To the pessimist
future tests fail -- keep
testing...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier
as one whole minute (grin)
is too long, then I'd suggest you cut out the caffeine, not fix
Mailman...
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Always look away from
improve this further, but majordomo has a
bad tendency to implode a system if you get a burst of content and
haven't tuned the system right. Mailman's designed to avoid that, and
what you're seeing is one of the tradeoff's needed to avoid that kind of
peak load resource crisis.
--
Chuq Von
loop can then select() off
the socket and go to sleep until soemthing gets written to it.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
Any connection between your
through it, or do it for you.
These tools assume a certain level of technical knowledge. If you don't
have that, you either need to get someone who does to help, or not use
them. It's not the tool's fault -- these things aren't blenders that
work as soon as you plug them in.
--
Chuq Von Rospach
else.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Yes, yes, I've finally finished my home page. Lucky you.
When his IQ reaches 50, he should sell.
--
Mailman-Users
On 7/11/01 3:46 PM, Forrest Aldrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read it, and while I can appreciate the effort to support RFC 2369, I
believe it would be beneficial to allow local administrators to make
exceptions according to the needs of their particular lists.
The FAQ below doesn't
me. Since it's a single process, your MP machine isn't
going to use all it's CPU, but the operation is going to be primarily
disk-limted anyway -- are you using fast disks? Slow disks?
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome http://www.chuqui.com
[[EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] = [EMAIL
On 7/14/01 11:32 AM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to brief examination here its lock bound rather than IO or
CPU.
So mailman is setting and removing the lock for every address? If so --
Barry, isn't that a design flaw for this case?
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Internet Gnome
On 10/1/01 2:10 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ouch. Please be aware of the implicit security hole you're opening
here.
Implicit? That's like calling amputation a flesh wound.
--
Mailman-Users maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 9/28/01 1:56 PM, Nancy Montano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Error decoding authorization cookie.
He recently moved out of the area and is now using a Satellite
connection. This is the only change he has made.
That's enough -- he's now going through a proxy server, and I've seen
problems
On 12/5/01 10:29 AM, Tass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
my issues are just with trying to do member operation ..
How long does it take to add/delete an individual member?
FWIW, in my experience, the delay isn't mailman. It's disk I/O. Almost all
of the time spent in this operation is in Disk I/O.
On 12/13/01 2:35 PM, William H. Sterner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm a new list manager and haven't been able to figure out how to
suppress the following List- lines in each message from the
Administrator's manual.
It's in the FAQ.
--
On 12/16/01 2:18 PM, The Berean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any workaround in Mailman to prevent this from happening again?
Shoot anyone who does it, preferably in public, preferably in the virtual
kneecaps, to convince all of your othre users not to be so stupid.
A misbehaving or badly
On 12/17/01 3:32 PM, Bill Moseley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got a list of about 11,000 currently on Solaris/Sendmail/listproc that
I'm thinking of moving to Linux/(qmail|Postfix)/mailman. Only one message
a week is sent.
Anyone running a list that big on Mailman? Any special setup
On 12/18/01 5:06 AM, Tass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
default_process_limit = 150
If you have 512M of Ram set it to 200, it will give you a lot of room.
Maybe. Maybe not.
One of the things you need to do when setting up your MTA is figure out what
your network can take. It makes no sense (in
On 12/20/01 1:01 AM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any capacity limitations as far as the number of names
mailman can handle at a single time?
Explicitly no. In terms of runtime resource consumption, yes.
I'd be very wary, unless you have really large iron. The current
On 12/20/01 11:56 AM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really? I manage two larger than that (neither on mailman).
Hurm. In my context above I'm assuming that list does not cover
marketing lists per se but only what we'd historically/'net-wise
consider a mailing list
Sorry, a list
On 1/30/02 9:38 PM, Ed Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Benny,
Yes - I'm using Apache, and SSI had been enabled.
But SSI generally doesn't work in CGI programs, which the python files are.
The two are basically mutually exclusive.
What I did was use mod_layout (www.tangent.org) instead
might require a little tweaking, but that's easy.
--
Chuq Von Rospach ([EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.chuqui.com/)
Will Geek for hardware.
The Cliff's Notes Cliff's Notes on Hamlet:
And they all died happily ever after
--
Mailman-Users
think I'll hold off for a bit and see how
this part of the saga plays out.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.chuqui.com/
Very funny, Scotty. Now beam my clothes down here, will you?
--
Mailman-Users maillist
the angry replies go back to the poor
schmuck in the reply-to -- and since I've already abandoned the hotmail
account I used to start the bomb, I'm off scott free)
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.chuqui.com/
He doesn't have ulcers, but he's a carrier
into messages with the karma
rating, so users could filter based on the karma rating. All sorts of fun
ways to get people to play karma politics on your mail list...
Funny, FWIW, is -3. It is one of the biggest problems with /. Karma. But I
digress.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
[EMAIL PROTECTED
On 4/7/02 5:30 PM, J C Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you considered that perhaps Mailman is just not for you?
Nope. Not relevant. Don't inject facts into a rant.
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.chuqui.com/
The first rule of holes: If you are in one
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
