Robin Szemeti wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
BTW - I've just had some fun trying to uncompress a .zip
file on Linux! tar gzip and gunzip don't seem to want to
know. Guess that makes me a luser!
you need the unzip(1)
Which, according to its home page at
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 06:19:27PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
Robin Szemeti wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
BTW - I've just had some fun trying to uncompress a .zip
file on Linux! tar gzip and gunzip don't seem to want to
know. Guess that makes me a luser!
you need
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 06:27:51PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 06:19:27PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
[unzip]
Which, according to its home page at
http://www.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/UnZip.html , is "the
third most portable program
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Seems like we've made a reasonable start on this project. We already
have a few scripts written - anyone want to report progress on any
of
the others?
I have Guestbook, FFA and simple search all ready to for testing
elsewhere - I'll package and upload
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Stowe" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Snip
* Bundling. Need to build gzipped tarballs of our new versions (I
guess
this should be built on top of the CVS stuff). Matt makes pkzipped
versions avaiable as well - so should
On the subject of having zip archives as well as tarballs on the server,
Gareth Harper said:
Winzip (what most windows users these days use to unzip) handlers tar.gz by
default so that may not be neccesary.
Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a social
point of view
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Shiels" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Stowe" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] sa
On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote:
On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you
here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as
a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set yourself up as a limited
company did/do
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote:
On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you
here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as
a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set
- Original Message -
From: "Robin Szemeti" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
apart from that the benfits of running as a Limited Company are large
(ish) assumi
At 15:40 20/03/2001 +, Gareth Harper wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Robin Szemeti" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
apart from that the benfits
Marty Pauley writes:
On Tue Mar 20 11:46:25 2001, Gareth Harper wrote:
On a completely off topic note I'm appealing to the contractors among you
here. Those of you who have yor own company. Did you set yourselves up as
a Limited Company, or as a Sole Trader. If you set yourself up
Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a social
point of view (What's this extension! I don't understand!
What's going on!
Excewpt that windows machines tend not to even show the extension by
default, and so the file will just have a little WinZip icon[0], which
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Robin Szemeti" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
apart from that the benfits of running as
All this is pre-ir35:
as a employee of a limited company you would be paid national minimum
wage (4 quid an hour) .. you pay NIC and tax on that ... (minimal) .. you
claim expenses off the (ie your own) company for all the driving around
you do and having to buy things and accomodation whilst
At 04:07 PM 20.3.2001 +, you wrote:
Not neccesary from a techical point of view. Neccesary from a
social point of view (What's this extension! I don't understand!
What's going on!
Except that windows machines tend not to even show the extension by
default, and so the file will just
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
All this is pre-ir35:
as a employee of a limited company you would be paid national minimum
wage (4 quid an hour) .. you pay NIC and tax on that ... (minimal) .. you
claim expenses off the (ie your own) company for all the driving around
you do and having
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:43:08AM -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
...except that the Windows extension hiding feature only applies to files seen
through the normal filesystem tools (Windows Explorer, various dialog boxes, etc),
and not Internetty stuff. People might still be scared off by seeing
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support
dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no wish to do so. If someone is
scared by a .tar.gz
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support
dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no wish to
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support
dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Shiels" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2001 6:47 PM
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
.tar.gz - wtf is that, why isn't there a zip file.
People keep misunderstanding this point: just because someon
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, you wrote:
BTW - I've just had some fun trying to uncompress a .zip file on Linux! tar
gzip and gunzip don't seem to want to know. Guess that makes me a luser!
you need the unzip(1)
NAMEunzip - list, test and extract compressed files in a ZI
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:48:25PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 05:38:09PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
Then they deserve to be hurt. Really. We can't possibly support
dribbling idiots, and frankly, I have no wish to
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
* Web page. Need somewhere to point potential users at. Probably two
versions - one for the developers and one for the users. This can be
a subdirectory on london.pm.org.
I don't mind doing this bit of it. I would quite like the idea of
creating a few
It has occured to us we need a decent name for this. Discussion on IRC
has concluded that:
a) It shouldn't mention Matt in the title.
b) That is should have a name that appeals to newbies.
c) It should sound at least semi-professional[1].
But apart from that we've been useless
Later.
At 12:40 19/03/2001 +, Mark Fowler wrote:
It has occured to us we need a decent name for this. Discussion on IRC
has concluded that:
a) It shouldn't mention Matt in the title.
So "Not the Matt Wright Archive" is out then ;-)
b) That is should have a name that appeals to newbies.
How
At Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:27:57 + (GMT), jo walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* CVS Repository (on Penderel?)
i can sort this, perhaps with veeghelp.
for leon and marcel's aspect oriented programming project we started a
/home/projects directory, we could put the not-matt stuff in there
At 13:18 19/03/2001 +, Mark Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Simon Wilcox wrote:
b) That is should have a name that appeals to newbies.
How about EasyScripts ? the domain name is available, anyway.
Not very perl, but I like it. Something similar though.
EasyPerlScripts or even
At 13:18 19/03/2001 +, Mark Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Simon Wilcox wrote:
b) That is should have a name that appeals to newbies.
How about EasyScripts ? the domain name is available, anyway.
Not very perl, but I like it. Something similar though.
EasyPerlScripts
From: "Simon Wilcox" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 March 2001 13:34
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts Projects
At 13:18 19/03/2001 +, Mark Fowler wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Simon Wilcox wrote:
b) That is should have a name that appeals to newbies.
Chris Devers wrote:
Probably, as is "The Matt's Wrong Archive", which is probably far
too negative obvious anyway... ;)
But if Matt Sergeant put it up ...
At 14:59 19/03/2001 +, Simon Wistow wrote:
Chris Devers wrote:
Probably, as is "The Matt's Wrong Archive", which is probably far
too negative obvious anyway... ;)
But if Matt Sergeant put it up ...
... it would all be in XML ;-)
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules,
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
Simple Search
Oh I have done that one as
At 16:44 16/03/2001, you wrote:
Leo Lapworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is not the same as those which daveh is writting,
main difference is it doesn't have configuration files
or code!
Ah. This is probably a good time to back out. One of the other Daves
beat me to it, and far better
Hi Guys,
I've created a random image generator (not Matt complient)
that I needed for a friend. Please feel fee to put it
in the collection.
This is not the same as those which daveh is writting,
main difference is it doesn't have configuration files
or code!
Leo Lapworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This is not the same as those which daveh is writting,
main difference is it doesn't have configuration files
or code!
Ah. This is probably a good time to back out. One of the other Daves
beat me to it, and far better than I would have done it and I've
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is indeed lovely. Although you don't need to do tunnelling magic:
rsync -options -e ssh source-list me@myserver:/destination
rsync is a wonderful beast. The -a and -z options, accompanied by
--progress (if they're big files) and --delete (for
Finding out where perl is
parody
Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello
world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you
actually working on these scripts yet!
/parody
You're all getting ahead of yourselves. We need to write a set of
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 10:19:42 + (GMT), Mark Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finding out where perl is
parody
Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello
world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you
actually working on these scripts
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Mark Fowler wrote:
Finding out where perl is
parody
Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello
world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you
actually working on these scripts yet!
/parody
*giggle*
L.
delete
Mark Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Finding out where perl is
parody
Stop, stop, this script archive is not ready yet! Where are the Hello
world examples? Where are the detailed instructions? And why are you
actually working on these scripts yet!
/parody
You're all getting
At 10:54 14/03/01 +, you wrote:
Mark Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Finding out where perl is
Ooh, 'configure.cgi'.
If only we could assume that they had a working perl on the box that
they were installing from then we could write a cunning installer
script which uploaded
(What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?)
Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl scripts
anywhere.
Some servers (especially in the paranoid ISP land) are configured to have
a /cgi-bin/ where you have to put files in that will be 'executed'.
Typically you cannot
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 11:28:19 + (GMT), Mark Fowler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?)
Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl
scripts anywhere.
We _like_ servers configured like this. Especially if they've got some
kind of
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
(What do you mean with "not-inplace cgi"?)
Some servers (like my own) are configured to allow you to run perl scripts
anywhere.
Some servers (especially in the paranoid ISP land) are configured to have
a /cgi-bin/ where you have to put files in that will
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 11:50:04AM +, Jon Eyre wrote:
In my experience, virtually *all* isps/hosting providers use the
'separate cgi-bin directory' configuration. either for the security
reasons outlined by evil dave ...
Eh-hem.
Evil Dave's server does *not* use seperate cgi-bin
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 12:46:45PM +, Jon Eyre wrote:
oops...
Heh. Just remember, Evil Dave is the paranoid nutcase, Dave Cross is the
one with the gold-plated cat.
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:05:05 +, David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Evil Dave's server does *not* use
My several users use scp.
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue
using ftp, because it's *easier*... People are lazy, and security
measures which are a pain in the arse will fail to work because the
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My several users use scp.
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue
using ftp, because it's *easier*...
They won't if you
On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed:
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients?
PuTTY.
my several users require them, or they'll just continue
using ftp, because it's *easier*... People are lazy, and security
measures which are a pain
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows?
On Windows I use pscp which comes from the same people as putty. It
works well, but it doesn't have a pretty graphical front-end.
Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm.
I suggest you peeps read
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My several users use scp.
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue
using ftp,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:55:28PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre wrote:
My several users use scp.
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients? my several users require them, or they'll just continue
using ftp,
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:34:32 + (GMT), Jon Eyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My several users use scp.
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients? my several users
On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:00:22PM +, Greg McCarroll typed:
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
They won't if you stop running the ftp daemon on the server :)
Rule one of security:
Ensure availability for authorised users
Rule zero of security:
A system with no
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed:
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients?
PuTTY.
SCP for Windoz = http://winscp.vse.cz/eng/
SCP for Linux = well, command
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:55:28PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
I've been thinking that, while not ideal, webDAV is probably the best
option here. I'm told it's a) secure-ish, and b) integrates nicely
with Dreamweaver and whatever microsoft's
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed:
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients?
PuTTY.
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
In case anybody hasn't
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:08:03PM +, Struan Donald wrote:
and people are worrying about plain scp confusing people? ssh
tunneling is one of those things that appears close enough to magic
that people assume it is. damn useful magic though.
plus it always seems such a pain on windows
At 03:00 PM 14.3.2001 +, Leo Lapworth wrote:
If anyone hears of a good gui SCP client for non-OSX mac's I'd
really like to know (I've got users on my machine that need it!).
Can Fetch do it? At a glance, I don't see anything about SCP there, but then I've only
done a cursory check; it may
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure.
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want
that user. I mean,
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:13:46PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
There is a GUI front-end for pscp, available from
http://www.i-tree.org/, apparently, although I haven't tried it.
This is kind of flakey, and has trouble with stuff like files owned by a
user or group with more than 8
* Neil Ford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:57:41PM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
On or about Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:34:32PM +, Jon Eyre typed:
is there an idiot-proof graphical front-end for scp? windows
clients?
PuTTY.
SCP for Windoz =
* at 14/03 14:59 + Mark Fowler said:
Do what we do. Keep everything running, but shove a whopping great
ipchains (or firewall of choice) in the way. If you want to access it,
ssh tunnel it first.
Would not ipsec be a better solution? It's transparent to the users,
and more reliable
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 16:10:02 +, David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure.
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing
which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I
don't want
that user. I mean, it's not hard FFS.
Scp is not hard. Users should be able to use scp. However, the real point is
that scp sucks. scp is to a sensible way of transfering files what
command.com is to a good shell. scp
Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm.
I've since installed WinSCP, from the list of alternatives on OpenSSH This
is also based on PuTTY and isn't so, well, dodgy as iXplorer. Forget I
ever mentioned it.
Seems to work well for me. The interface is clunky (i.e. you have to
press
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote:
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed.
Using WebDAV on a internal staging server and then updating the live
server with something rsync-ish using scp might be a good
usability/security
* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
At Wed, 14 Mar 2001 16:10:02 +, David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:01:17PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
WebDAV is ok, but you'd need to run it over HTTPS to be secure.
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means
* at 14/03 15:22 + Michael Stevens said:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want
that user. I mean, it's not hard FFS.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:22:59PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want
that user. I
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
"In a recent survey, 9 out of 10 MS Windows users were found to have
difficulties maximising and moving their windows. Macintosh users were
not admitted to the tests because they had difficulties with the door
handle at the lab where the
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 03:50:14PM +, Struan Donald wrote:
* at 14/03 15:22 + Michael Stevens said:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed. If a user can't
Wednesday, March 14, 2001, 11:34:16 AM, grep wrote:
GM * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
An admirable point of view in my opinion. Why would anyone possibly
want to run an ISP and have to deal with all the clueless people?
GM Mike J, you used to work for AOL, you should be more than
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
And they just give 'em out. No checks, no confirming with the
customers, nothing. There's little hope of
securing stuff if people can be socially
engineered so easily.
That's a matter of setting policy. If there's no policy in place to
prevent that,
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
enough people find moving/copying files on windows complex... when
you start introducing a second computer...
hmmm I wouldn't place such creatures as far up the food chain as 'people'
.. but I know what you mean.
--
Robin Szemeti
The box said "requires
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
Yes there is. http://www.i-tree.org/ixplorer.htm.
I've since installed WinSCP, from the list of alternatives on OpenSSH This
is also based on PuTTY and isn't so, well, dodgy as iXplorer. Forget I
ever mentioned it.
Terraterm and TTSSH are what I have on
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
Scp is not hard. Users should be able to use scp. However, the real point is
that scp sucks. scp is to a sensible way of transfering files what
command.com is to a good shell. scp is stateless.
scp makes you enter your
password, again, all the time.
err
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 04:10:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
WebDAV is not OK, cos it means installing yet more stuff on the server
which is simply not needed. If a user can't use scp, then I don't want
that user. I mean, it's not hard FFS.
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:28:03PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, you wrote:
That's a matter of setting policy. If there's no policy in place to
prevent that, then you can expect people to do it. If you have a security
policy which states that you will fire people for
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 06:44:55PM +, Robin Szemeti wrote:
I dont have a problem with scp .. but I can see it would annoy the drag
and drop brigade ... it works for me and I script those batch transfers
and site updates anyway .. I keep meaning to look at rsync over an ssh
tunnel but
Robin Szemeti wrote:
of course if you _did_ want to discover a users password its
not that hard .. there are ways ... I believe we have some
world renowned experts on the topic at hand ... now where is
'merlin' when you need him :)
ITYM 'merlyn' (or 'q[merlyn]').
HTH. HAND.
Cheers,
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules,
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
Random Image Displayer daveh
Random Link
Textclock Mark
Countdown Mark
Later.
Mark.
--
print "\n",map{my$a="\n"if(length$_6);' 'x(36-length($_)/2)."$_\n$a"} (
Name = 'Mark Fowler',Title = 'Technology Developer' ,
Firm = 'Profero Ltd',Web = 'http://www.profero.com/'
At 15:18 13/03/2001, you wrote:
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no external modules,
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
Guestbook davorg
WWWboard davorg
--
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no
external modules,
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
To which we should add that in default configuration the new script has the
same
At 15:44 13/03/2001, you wrote:
Dave wrote:
Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down
really I
suppose. Here it is if you're interested.
And what's wrong with the following line? ;-)
#!/usr/local/bin/perl -w
D'Oh. It's a fair cop :-)
In my defense, there isn't
At 15:47 13/03/2001, you wrote:
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've discussed (no
external modules,
-T, use strict, -w, etc), put you name next to it on this list.
To which we should add that in default
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 14:23 13/03/2001, you wrote:
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, here's a list of Matt's scripts. If you'd like to have a go at
rewriting one or two under the rules we've
IIRC the problem with some of them is that they use config
data supplied
in form variables... do we really want to maintain this?
Yes, we do. It's a useful way of supplying configuration information,
because editing form fields in HTML has a lower fear threshold than editing
perl source
Dave Cross wrote:
Oops. I just did the Random Text one.
Two comments:
- what's with the "\%\%" in the separator? '%' isn't special in
double-quoted strings, last time I checked. This looks like Mattcode which
backwhacks just about anything ("$hh\:$mm\:$ss" comes to mind, for example).
-
Yes, but *is a security hole, and not a small one*, usually.
Yes, if you put the wrong things in there, like locations of files. I guess
maybe Matt does this. On the other hand, other things can go in harmlessly,
and should, such as the response email address for formmail.
As for the security
From: "Dave Cross" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 March 2001 15:47
Subject: Re: Matt's Scripts
At 14:23 13/03/2001, you wrote:
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oops. I just did the Random Text one. Should have put my name down really
I
suppose. Here it is
At 16:53 13/03/01 +, you wrote:
At 16:39 13/03/2001, you wrote:
Dave Cross wrote:
Oops. I just did the Random Text one.
And, of course, there should be a comment at the top above
#!/usr/local/bin/perl to the effect that "you should edit this to point to
where Perl [version 5.00x or above]
At 16:55 13/03/01 -, you wrote:
Could we write some sort of internal installer process so the
instruction
to the user would be type 'perl rand_text2.pl configure' and
the script
then rewrites itself. Updating #! lines etc, possibly even asking
No, most people using these scripts don't
At 05:03 PM 13.3.2001 +, you wrote:
No, most people using these scripts don't have command line access to the servers
that they need to install the scripts on. We'd have to do something like:
go to http://www.yoursite.com/cgi-bin/randtext2.pl?mode=configure
and then have configure itself
*need* to configure #!.
#!/bin/sh
*ducks*
98 matches
Mail list logo
