On 3/26/20 4:27 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote: > On 3/26/20 4:16 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:29:03PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote: >>> -On 3/25/20 7:55 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:23:02PM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote: >>>>> I believe the canonical place for the "Linux suff" mailing lists these >>>>> days is >>>>> lore.kernel.org, powered by public-inbox[1]. ISTM that software can >>>>> address most >>>>> if not all needs of those involved in GCC development and even has NNTP >>>>> support, >>>>> though I've no idea whether it could be an acceptable solution from the >>>>> overseers' perspective. >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git >>>> >>>> The overseers are trying hard to use only software that can be installed >>>> via the RHEL packaging system so as not to duplicate the mistake that >>>> kept us dependent on poorly supported mail software. Is there a >>>> public-inbox rpm package for RHEL or CentOS? >>>> >>>> FWIW, this particular overseer is is also pretty exhausted from the >>>> effort of moving sourceware to a new system + new software and would not >>>> relish the effort involved in getting all of this moved to new software. >>>> >>> >>> Honestly this is not about blaming you at all. >>> >>> I do not quite understand what is the exact software which >>> was used previously? >>> >>> what is the exact problem that prevents it from being used any longer? >>> >>> Which software is being used now? >>> >>> Why is gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org. and fort...@gcc.gnu.org >>> even this e-mail thread visible >>> on marc.info: https://marc.info/?l=gcc&m=158512515107459&w=2 >>> but not gdb-patches ? >>> >>> Could you add a link to https://marc.info/?l=gcc-patches >>> https://marc.info/?l=gcc >>> https://marc.info/?l=gcc-fortran >>> note the unsystematic name gcc-fortran, the list is fort...@gcc.gnu.org >>> >>> There is no gcc-help on marc.info >>> There is https://marc.info/?l=gcc >>> but there is no gdb-patches >>> >>> what needs to be done to host those lists on marc.info as well? >>> >>> What needs to be done to host these lists on spinics for instance, >>> or what else exists that can be used to search the messages? >> >> marc.info is an independent site that is not associated with >> sourceware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their >> site then ask them. >> >> The mailing list software is all easily discernible by investigating >> email headers and via google but someone else answered your questions >> later in this thread. >> > > But don't you think that we change something in 6.3 to make them break. > like no longer sending updates, or something? > > Don't you have any idea what changed on our side? > > I mean what should I tell them they should do to fix that????? > >
Ah, marc.info is fixed, it turned out that the messages were just Quarantined because due to the change in the ip adresses, mailing software etc. marc.info was under the impression that all these messages were just spam. That is what they told me: "For lists that often get spammed, we set up some silent header-checks so that mails that don't look like they came from the real listserver get quarrantined, and don't appear when viewing that list. Well, that can break when mailing list software changes - like when they switched away from ezmlm to Mailman. I've updated our filter check and un-quarrantined about 4500 mails to various gcc- lists that landed there this month." So indeed all our mailing list message are again on marc.info, I think when it can handle lkml it can handle gcc-patches as well. Many Thanks go to Hank Leininger who does a gread job with marc.info. Bernd.
