RE: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Mike Davis
Title: RE: Mailing List Archive





Why don't we make our own archive and ask mail-archive.com to stop doing their thing? Then we have control of what is published and everyone's happy...

 -Original Message-
 From: alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 3:22 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: Mailing List Archive
 
 
 
 a public archive containing all our email addresses is obviously bad.
 no-spam countermeasures help, but it's an ugly solution..
 
 it's also about atmosphere. i don't like contributing to a friendly,
 discussive list that's archived and searchable by anyone who 
 happens to
 drop by. mutual trust is a valuable thing.
 
 -- 
 i recommend dramatically combined, shaped snack pastries for business.
 





RE: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Dave Cross

At Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:23:17 -, Mike Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Why don't we make our own archive and ask mail-archive.com to stop 
 doing their thing? Then we have control of what is published and 
 everyone's happy...

I don't think that mail-archive would be amenable to removing the 
archive. Their FAQ says that they don't delete stuff from their
archives.

Also, in the general case this doesn't help us. There's nothing to
stop anyone subscribing a mail-reaper to the list at any time. 
mail-archive's bot is obvious as it's called [EMAIL PROTECTED], but they
don't need to be so easy to spot.

Best idea that I came up whilst thinking about it last night was to
configure majordomo to automatically add an 'X-No-Archive' header to
all mails on the list. But even that only avoids archives that play by
the rules.

Dave...



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Mark Fowler

This is my two pence worth:

 1. I stand by everything I've ever said on the the list.  If I didn't
mean it I wouldn't have said it.

 2. However, I can see problems with people taking things I've said out of
context.  Pah, so be it.  This is the problem with the world.

 3. If I wanted to say something in private, I'd do it off list.  Or on
irc.  Or on one of the private lists I'm a member of.

 4. However, it is apparent that certain people (read headhunters) are
reading this list and taking advantage of it (using my phone number.)

 5. As far as stuff getting back to my employer, well my employer has
benefited from me being on list something chronic.  The knowledge I've
gained, amongst other things, has been highly useful.  P.S. I'm late
for work.  Daryl, if you're reading this then I owe you an extra hour
;-)

So in conclusion, I'm for an open list.  But I don't care enough to object
either way.  joke I think the real question should be, do we munge
reply-tos or not /joke

Later.

Mark.

P.S. Oi, recruiters.  I'm happy where I work.  Ta.

1984: These are my personal opinions, and do not represent my employer.
-- 
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/'   ,
   Email = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone = '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )








RE: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Peterson

 Best idea that I came up whilst thinking about it last night was to
 configure majordomo to automatically add an 'X-No-Archive' header to
 all mails on the list. But even that only avoids archives that play by
 the rules.

Seems like a good idea to me. The fact that mailing lists are ultimately not
private forums doesn't mean we can't try to establish a degree of privacy.
There strikes me as being a massive qualatative difference between  someone
searching for my name and a company's name to see what I've been saying
about that company, and someone having to find out what mailing lists I'm
on, and then subscribe to and read the lists waiting to see what I say.

Leon brought up the matter of conversations in pubs. There's no reason why
someone coulnd't hire a sleuth to turn up to the london.pm meeting posing as
a new member and get them to find out who's saying what. But that's a big
leap to take, and not an argument for saying that all conversations in pubs
should be considered public knowledge just because that's a technical
possibiltity.





Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread jduncan

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:07:18AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
 * James Powell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  
  To make it harder for google to find you - change your name Prince style.
  
 
 good idea!
 
 - greg of wales

This is the best laugh I've had in a little while. Thanks.

james.

-- 
James A. Duncan
W: www.fotango.com
P: +44 207 251 7021
F: +44 207 608 3592

 PGP signature


Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Richard Clamp

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 08:20:28PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
 It seems that mail-archive.com have been archiving our list for some
 time and anyone who knows about mail-archive can find anything posted
 to our list.

I've got no real problem with having my contributions publically archived,
the list being open to all anyway.

That said I would have liked to have been informed of it when subscribing to
the list (or for those of us that have been here for donkeys, when it
started getting archived,) just so that I could be sure it was happening.

-- 
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Greg Cope

Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
 
 Robin Houston [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  (Sadly I no longer have shell access to any four-processor Sun
  machines to confirm this.)
 
 Which reminds me.
 
 How in gods name do Sun get away with charging so much for stuff?
 We've erm, "acquired" an enterprise 420. this box has 2 CPUs, 4G or
 RAM and about 80G of disk. For the same money I could build a clutster
 of what, 30 linux boxes? Don't tell me programmer time has got that
 expensive? Or that thinking about what you're doing stopped happening?
 If it's good enough for Google...
 
 Help me out here!

It is good kit (and alot of it is rebadged stuff - with nice blue / gray
boxes and Sun stickers).

But it's also a marketing thing  I know tow clients whom purchased
15k of sun kit each, and in either case a good Linux / Free|OpenBSD box
would have done the same.

The only time I recommend sun is when you need a bigger box than a twin
Pentium machine - and even then I mentions Alpha's (as I think they as
just as good a Sun's for the_just_above_intel market).

Also a a final Sun rant, sometime's it hard to scale / cluster stuff i.e
a RDBMS system is not a simple thing to cluster - and buying a bigger
box is the less of two evils.

Well that's a rant over first thing on Friday !

Greg


 
 --
 Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
 Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
   Apache, mod_perl, MySQL, Sybase hired gun for, well, hire
   -



RE: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Peterson

For the same money I could build
 a clutster
  of what, 30 linux boxes? Don't tell me programmer time has got that
  expensive? Or that thinking about what you're doing stopped
 happening?
  If it's good enough for Google...
 
  Help me out here!

 It is good kit (and alot of it is rebadged stuff - with nice
 blue / gray
 boxes and Sun stickers).

 But it's also a marketing thing  I know tow clients whom purchased


It's also a support thing. Sun's support service is very good, and although
it costs _as much as the hardware again_ you can't get it unless you buy the
hardware in the first place. Yes, this results in truly horrendous costs,
but then you can just pick up the phone and say 'This thing doesn't boot,
fix it today please'. No paperwork, no "I'll need your customer id and this
is your ticket number if you have any questions", just "our engineer will be
there in 45 minutes".

Also, remember that large companies can negotiate discounts approaching 50%
on much of the kit.

That all said, Sun's low end offerings, like the T1 are neat machines but
not good value. You can buy two 1-unit no-brand intel boxes with Linux for
the same price. When you are looking at the E420Rs and such, there aren't
really Intel boxes in the same arena except maybe from HP and Compaq, and
they cost nearly as much.




RE: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Barman, Harry

I'd agree with this. We buy large amounts of Sun kit.

Although I don't make these decisions my take on why is:
- Even though you can automate sysadmin tasks, generally more boxes mean
more sysadmin effort. Given our compute requirements we would need very
large numbers of PCs to replace our sun machines (we buy large numbers of
E45ks).
- Space. Machine room space with appropriate aircon and power systems costs
money. Fewer but more powerful machines make sense. [yes you could go rack
mount PC, but then you'd be tying yourselves to a smaller set of
manufacturers which means you'll be paying more than you would for generic
boxes]
- Reliablity. Outages can cost us serious amounts of money  reputation.
Although Suns aren't the most reliable machines in the world, they are much
more reliable than generic PCs (and parts are hot-swappable). They are also
suitable for setting up with off-site failover to secondary machines.
- Scalablity. nproc2 is expensive for PCs. We run large database servers
that work better on multiprocessor machines (for instance 10 processor 8GB].
- Standardisation. Buying kit from one manufacturer simplifies hardware
maintenance and upgrades

So for us it makes sense. For other people where you don't have the above
constraints it's probably not worth the extra.

-- Harry

-Original Message-
From: Greg Cope [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 January 2001 10:17
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce
platforms


Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
 
 Robin Houston [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
  (Sadly I no longer have shell access to any four-processor Sun
  machines to confirm this.)
 
 Which reminds me.
 
 How in gods name do Sun get away with charging so much for stuff?
 We've erm, "acquired" an enterprise 420. this box has 2 CPUs, 4G or
 RAM and about 80G of disk. For the same money I could build a clutster
 of what, 30 linux boxes? Don't tell me programmer time has got that
 expensive? Or that thinking about what you're doing stopped happening?
 If it's good enough for Google...
 
 Help me out here!

It is good kit (and alot of it is rebadged stuff - with nice blue / gray
boxes and Sun stickers).

But it's also a marketing thing  I know tow clients whom purchased
15k of sun kit each, and in either case a good Linux / Free|OpenBSD box
would have done the same.

The only time I recommend sun is when you need a bigger box than a twin
Pentium machine - and even then I mentions Alpha's (as I think they as
just as good a Sun's for the_just_above_intel market).

Also a a final Sun rant, sometime's it hard to scale / cluster stuff i.e
a RDBMS system is not a simple thing to cluster - and buying a bigger
box is the less of two evils.

Well that's a rant over first thing on Friday !

Greg


 
 --
 Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
 Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
   Apache, mod_perl, MySQL, Sybase hired gun for, well, hire
   -



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:35:45AM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
 I suspect things like SMP probably still work better.  And if I were
 on call supporting a server I would probably still trust a Sparc
 running Solaris over some dodgy PC desktop with Redhat stuck on it by
 a hobbyist who has never used another UNIX.

Multi processor Solaris runs rings around any of the free Unixes.
They've had kernel threads for nearly 10 years, and it's very optimized.

I suspect that SGIs IRIX is equally good, but I have no experience of
that to speak from.

-Dom



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread David Cantrell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:17:21AM +, Greg Cope wrote:

 Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
 
  How in gods name do Sun get away with charging so much for stuff?
 
 It is good kit
 
 But it's also a marketing thing  I know tow clients whom purchased
 15k of sun kit each, and in either case a good Linux / Free|OpenBSD box
 would have done the same.
 
 The only time I recommend sun is when you need a bigger box than a twin
 Pentium machine - and even then I mentions Alpha's (as I think they as
 just as good a Sun's for the_just_above_intel market).

I recommend Sun when the customer needs enterprise-level support (I just
ain't convinced by Dell/Compaq/HP's offerings) and when they need to run
Oracle.  I'm not ready to recommend Oracle on Linux yet.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

   Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Richard Clamp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 08:20:28PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
  It seems that mail-archive.com have been archiving our list for some
  time and anyone who knows about mail-archive can find anything posted
  to our list.
 
 I've got no real problem with having my contributions publically archived,
 the list being open to all anyway.
 
 That said I would have liked to have been informed of it when subscribing to
 the list (or for those of us that have been here for donkeys, when it
 started getting archived,) just so that I could be sure it was happening.
 

how about if we notified the list everytime someone subscribed or 
unsubscribed



-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Andy Williams

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:35:45AM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
  I suspect things like SMP probably still work better.  And if I were
  on call supporting a server I would probably still trust a Sparc
  running Solaris over some dodgy PC desktop with Redhat stuck on it by
  a hobbyist who has never used another UNIX.

 Multi processor Solaris runs rings around any of the free Unixes.
 They've had kernel threads for nearly 10 years, and it's very optimized.

 I suspect that SGIs IRIX is equally good, but I have no experience of
 that to speak from.


Tru64 from Compaq isn't too shabby either... however they are expensive...
probably get the same power to cost ratio with clustered Linux boxes on
Intel!!

Andy




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Greg Cope

Steve Mynott wrote:
 
 Dave Hodgkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 [..]
 
  How in gods name do Sun get away with charging so much for stuff?
 
 Because they can and they have a brand people trust like IBM or
 Microsoft.  In fact you can buy far cheaper Sun clones from companies
 like Transtec but the Sun name tends (rather irrationally) to carry
 more weight in some circles (eg. telcos, ISP and City).  Many people
 use clones internally but Sun kit for the stuff customers see.
 
  We've erm, "acquired" an enterprise 420. this box has 2 CPUs, 4G or
  RAM and about 80G of disk. For the same money I could build a
  clutster of what, 30 linux boxes? Don't tell me programmer time has
  got that expensive? Or that thinking about what you're doing stopped
  happening?  If it's good enough for Google...
 
 You can't really compare Suns with standard PCs because they have
 numerous advantages still -- 64 bit archecture, faster bus, SCSI
 (although some use IDE now).  It's still expensive to get PCs in 1U
 cases and you can fit a lot of Netra T1s in a 19" rack.  Although for
 desktop use the framebuffers rarely have enough colours to be useable.
 
 I suspect things like SMP probably still work better.  And if I were
 on call supporting a server I would probably still trust a Sparc
 running Solaris over some dodgy PC desktop with Redhat stuck on it by
 a hobbyist who has never used another UNIX.


Cutting - 

Althought I agree with the sentiment that a Sparc box will probably be
more reliable than a generic PC.  However

s /some dodgy PC desktop with Redhat stuck on it by a hobbyist who has
never used another UNIX/inexperienced/;

Lets not compare inexperience with anyparticular flavour of *nix.

Greg

Who started on Redhat along time ago, and has since used and initially
disliked Solaris/Sun OS, but has since softened as is happy to work on
any *nix.


 
 Having said that I think they are probably doomed to occupy an
 increasingly small niche and things like clustered Free UNIX clones
 (PVM on BSD or Beowolf on Linux) certainly offer more bang per buck.
 
 --
 1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 if you have any trouble sounding condescending,
 find a unix user to show you how it's done.
  --scott adams



RE: Dream weaver

2001-01-26 Thread Matthews Simon

You're right I think it probably would make a good topic to TPC5.  Just need
the time to write it.  The patch has not yet made it into the main wvWare
distribution although some of mine have.  wvWare itself is extremely stable
and I have not found any problems with wvWare.  I am currently looking at
other languages French / Portuguese etc.  wvWare has got much better over
the last few months and many of the issues that I had with have now gone
away.  But in the tidy ups of the core some of my patches will need
re-implementing.  But I am looking at this at the moment.  So when (if?) we
get a stable base and my patched work then I'll submit them.

SAM


  -Original Message-
  From: Leon Brocard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 2:18 PM
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: Re: Dream weaver
  
  
  Matthews Simon sent the following bits through the ether:
  
   Our solution to this has been to write some perl
   code to convert Word documents (marketers tool of choice) into
   Template::Toolkit templates that we use internally.
  
  IIRC, you had patched wvware to output XML. Has this patch made it
  into the main wvware distribution, and if not why not? ;-) Have you
  found wvware stable enough to do this properly everytime, or do you
  force your users to use standard templates?
  
  Leon
  
  ps would make a good talk for tpc ;-)
  -- 
  Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
  yapc::Europehttp://yapc.org/Europe/
  
  ... Join the Group Mind - become a Borg
  



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Greg Cope

Michael Stevens wrote:
 
 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:35:45AM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
  I suspect things like SMP probably still work better.  And if I were
  on call supporting a server I would probably still trust a Sparc
  running Solaris over some dodgy PC desktop with Redhat stuck on it by
  a hobbyist who has never used another UNIX.
 
 Can't we compare something vaguely equivalent here instead?
 
 I personally would have just as little faith in Solaris run by someone
 who didn't know what they were doing as I would in Redhat run by
 someone who didn't know what they were doing.

Here, here !

 
 How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
 someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
 as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
 with solaris?
 
 (And, myself, I'd recommend the PC for some situations, and the Solaris box
 for others).
 
 My main problem with the PC architecture is that you can do a lot by carefully
 picking a good manufacturer, but it's still fundamentally not as solid and
 consistent as sun stuff, IMHO.
 
 I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as
 Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience
 paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your
 money?
 
 Michael
 
 [1] OS changed on the grounds I feel that Redhat ships something more
 optimised towards desktop use, whereas I feel Debian and Solaris are both
 more suited for servers.


Would this still hold for a RedDrat system with all the X stuff and
other unncessary stuff removed ?

And if not - what else do you you think is different ?

I've a small shell script that does quite a bit of rpm -e (remove) on X
stuff / other druff that redhat installs by default - it would be nice
if they included a stripped down install class in their default install
- which left you with a basic machine 

Greg



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Roger Burton West

On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:07:02AM +, Michael Stevens typed:

I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as
Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience
paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your
money?

Dell offer this on some of their servers. IMHO this is always a waste of
money - they don't provide anything that you couldn't do yourself by
having a stock of spare parts and someone competent on call.

OTOH, if you pay for the support, generally you get a machine that was
put together by someone who knew how it was supposed to go, rather than
the colour-blind monkeys they normally use.

R



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:18:06AM +, Greg Cope wrote:
  How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
  someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
  as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
  with solaris?
  
  (And, myself, I'd recommend the PC for some situations, and the Solaris box
  for others).
  
  My main problem with the PC architecture is that you can do a lot by carefully
  picking a good manufacturer, but it's still fundamentally not as solid and
  consistent as sun stuff, IMHO.
  
  I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as
  Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience
  paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your
  money?
  
  Michael
  
  [1] OS changed on the grounds I feel that Redhat ships something more
  optimised towards desktop use, whereas I feel Debian and Solaris are both
  more suited for servers.
 
 
 Would this still hold for a RedDrat system with all the X stuff and
 other unncessary stuff removed ?
 
 And if not - what else do you you think is different ?
 
 I've a small shell script that does quite a bit of rpm -e (remove) on X
 stuff / other druff that redhat installs by default - it would be nice
 if they included a stripped down install class in their default install
 - which left you with a basic machine 

IMHO the main significance here is in the default install. You can
fiddle around with anything if you want and make it vaguely sensible as a
server.

Redhat as default is not very well setup to use as a server on the internet
(I feel). Debian I think is a lot better as shipped, as is Solaris,
mostly on the grounds they're less prone to installing irrelevant
crap[1].

Michael

[1] My solaris admin experience is almost completely nonexistent, but I'd
drawing on my experience as a user of solaris systems.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:19:02AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
 On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:07:02AM +, Michael Stevens typed:
 I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as
 Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience
 paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your
 money?
 Dell offer this on some of their servers. IMHO this is always a waste of
 money - they don't provide anything that you couldn't do yourself by
 having a stock of spare parts and someone competent on call.

I don't really like most big name linux stuff, because all they seem to
support is Redhat, and while I can completely understand their reasons,
I find it almost impossible to make a Redhat system into something that I
like.

Michael



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Andy Williams

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Michael Stevens wrote:

 Can't we compare something vaguely equivalent here instead?

 I personally would have just as little faith in Solaris run by someone
 who didn't know what they were doing as I would in Redhat run by
 someone who didn't know what they were doing.

 How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
 someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
 as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
 with solaris?

 (And, myself, I'd recommend the PC for some situations, and the Solaris box
 for others).

 My main problem with the PC architecture is that you can do a lot by carefully
 picking a good manufacturer, but it's still fundamentally not as solid and
 consistent as sun stuff, IMHO.

 I imagine you could get a pc service contract on the same level as
 Sun do, but I have no experience in the area. Has anyone got any experience
 paying vast amounts of money for PC support? did you get much for your
 money?

We are currently getting support for all our redhat boxes running on
Compaq.
Compaq offer 24x7, 2 hour response/4 hour fix on their intel boxes (at a
price)... They also offer basic RedHat support.
Redhat offer OS support for 625 UKP per server (9-6 Mon-Fri)
RHCE Course is only 1500 UKP too.

Andy




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:30:03AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
 On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:23:26AM +, Michael Stevens typed:
 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:19:02AM +, Roger Burton West wrote:
  Dell offer this on some of their servers. IMHO this is always a waste of
  money - they don't provide anything that you couldn't do yourself by
  having a stock of spare parts and someone competent on call.
 I don't really like most big name linux stuff, because all they seem to
 support is Redhat, and while I can completely understand their reasons,
 I find it almost impossible to make a Redhat system into something that I
 like.
 
 Agreed entirely. I was thinking purely of hardware support; software
 support IME is always and everywhere a complete waste of time and money.
 
 And then people wonder why I like open source...

I've heard rumours that software support can be useful, but not yet
encountered such a thing.

Michael



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:30:28AM +, Struan Donald wrote:
 on the other hand kickstart files aren't that tricky to write and you
 can then set up the box in a sensible way (or something approaching
 that) and it's very easy to set up a chunk of boxes the same. 
 
 of course you a box to put the kcikstart stuff on (assuming network
 install...)

Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff
I didn't know about?

If it is just a solaris thing, I was holding up solaris boxes as being
GOOD because they don't come with much stuff installed. For servers,
I see this as a desirable feature.

One of these days I must play with the FAI (fully automatic installation)
stuff for debian.

Michael



RE: [uri@sysarch.com: free copy of data munging with perl]

2001-01-26 Thread Clyne, Richard

I sugest that we give it to Dave Cross
Richard

-Original Message-
From: Dave Cross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 January 2001 07:33
To: london.pm
Subject: Fwd: [[EMAIL PROTECTED]: free copy of data munging with perl]


I'd be failing in my duty as group leader if I didn't pass on this
announcement from the Perl Mongers Group Leaders mailing list :)

Dave...





Re: [uri@sysarch.com: free copy of data munging with perl]

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Dave Cross wrote:
 I'd be failing in my duty as group leader if I didn't pass on this
 announcement from the Perl Mongers Group Leaders mailing list :)
 
 Dave...
 
 - Forwarded message from Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
 
 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 15:25:55 -0500
 From: Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: free copy of data munging with perl
 
 
 this is forwarded from manning and they are offering each pm group a
 free copy of data munging with perl by dave cross.

Hey! Now Dave can have his very own free copy of DMWP!

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:39:17AM +, Struan Donald wrote:
  One of these days I must play with the FAI (fully automatic installation)
  stuff for debian.
 kickstart is (i assume) teh redhat equiv of FAI. or at least it is if
 FAI is stick floppy in system, create symlink in some magic format i
 can't quite remember on kickstart server and reboot box. go and make
 beverage of choice, come back to newly installed box.

They sound similiar.

Google reveals that what I was thinking of was Jumpstart, which is the
solaris approach to all this.

I think the FAI stuff will work with remote boot roms on the network
cards if you want to do that, too.

I don't have any info but I think FAI is fairly immature.

I just prefer a small system which makes it easy to install what you
want rather than a big one where you have to remove stuff.

I dunno.

Michael



Re: Another OScon Europe Sanity Check

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:

 Cumberland Hotel (overlooks Hyde Park), October 16-19 (Tue-Fri).
 
 Anyone see problems (clashes with other conferences, plans for riots
 that week, the Cumberland is famous for its urine cocktails, etc)?
 

Sounds fine to me.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Dave Cross

At Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:59:34 -, "Robert Shiels" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I never say anything I wouldn't stand by on any list, but as the 
 search engines get better, more people than I'd like will have access 
 to what I say. How many of you who have discussed drug use would like 
 their parents/children reading that you were a complete pothead at 
 university :-)

Well, not so much parents/children - but the fact that potential clients
might find my opinions on certain subjects is a bit worrying. I think
I once lost a job at a bank because they saw the page on BAe on my 
website.

 So I'm all for the (void) approach. we have an archive it's 
 accessable by a simple username/password.

This is all a fine plan, but it doesn't prevent external people from
achiving us in the same way that mail-archive do. I really don't think
there's a foolproof way to prevent it.

Dave...



List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd))

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

For those that might be interested this was when mail-archive started
archiving london-list.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |

-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 07:11:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org

--

archive@jab.org has been added to london-list.
No action is required on your part.




Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Richard Clamp

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:35AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
 * Richard Clamp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  That said I would have liked to have been informed of it when subscribing to
  the list (or for those of us that have been here for donkeys, when it
  started getting archived,) just so that I could be sure it was happening.

 how about if we notified the list everytime someone subscribed or 
 unsubscribed

Eh, don't quite follow.

Personally I like to be able to get mbox archives in preference to web
archives, but then I like my mail client much more than my web broswer.

Richard - hoarder, with no use of a web archive anyhow :)

-- 
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd))

2001-01-26 Thread James Powell

Phew, just missed my 29th Sept post where I detailed my plans for
a perl script to overthrow the government.

jp

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:01:21PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
 For those that might be interested this was when mail-archive started
 archiving london-list.
 
 /J\
 -- 
 Jonathan Stowe   |   
 http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
 http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |
 
 -- Forwarded message --
 Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 07:11:22 -0400 (EDT)
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org
 
 --
 
 archive@jab.org has been added to london-list.
 No action is required on your part.



Re: [uri@sysarch.com: free copy of data munging with perl]

2001-01-26 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  
  this is forwarded from manning and they are offering each pm group a
  free copy of data munging with perl by dave cross.
 
 Hey! Now Dave can have his very own free copy of DMWP!
 

and we can all sign it!



-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Dave Cross wrote:
 If the majority are against it then I'll do what I can to
 prevent it.

The obvious thing would be to arrange for archive@jab.org (or whatever it
is) to unsubscribe from the list. I believe they don't delete archived
articles, but if they aren't subscribed to the list any more, then it's only
a snapshot from month X to month Y, with nothing before or after.

Cheers,
Phi 'telnet lists.dircon.co.uk 25' lip



Re: List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd))

2001-01-26 Thread Dave Cross

At Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:01:21 + (GMT), Jonathan Stowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 For those that might be interested this was when mail-archive started
 archiving london-list.
 
 -- Forwarded message --
 Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 07:11:22 -0400 (EDT)
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org
 
 --
 
 archive@jab.org has been added to london-list.
 No action is required on your part.

I wonder what mail-archive would do if we just unsubbed their bot?

Dave...



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Dave Cross wrote:
 At Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:23:17 -, Mike Davis 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Why don't we make our own archive and ask mail-archive.com to stop 
  doing their thing? Then we have control of what is published and 
  everyone's happy...
 
 I don't think that mail-archive would be amenable to removing the 
 archive. Their FAQ says that they don't delete stuff from their
 archives.

But if their archivebot is unsubscribed, then they'll stop archiving from
that point on.

Cheers,
Philip



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Robin Houston

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:50:59AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote:
 
 This is all a fine plan, but it doesn't prevent external people from
 achiving us in the same way that mail-archive do. I really don't think
 there's a foolproof way to prevent it.

I doubt that's a serious problem.

I assume that someone deliberately added mail-archive's bot to the
list, because mail-archive certainly don't hunt down lists themselves.

If we have an explicit "no public archives" policy then presumably
people will have the decency to honour it, and not subscrive archive
bots to the list.

 .robin.

-- 
Flee to me, remote elf!



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:

 * Richard Clamp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
  On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 08:20:28PM +, Dave Cross wrote:
   It seems that mail-archive.com have been archiving our list for some
   time and anyone who knows about mail-archive can find anything posted
   to our list.
  
  I've got no real problem with having my contributions publically archived,
  the list being open to all anyway.
  
  That said I would have liked to have been informed of it when subscribing to
  the list (or for those of us that have been here for donkeys, when it
  started getting archived,) just so that I could be sure it was happening.
  
 
 how about if we notified the list everytime someone subscribed or 
 unsubscribed
 

This can be done ver', ver' easily - It would also have the positive
benefit of breaking the ice for nervous lurkers.

If no-one objects I will put this in place this weekend.  I guess it will
result in ~ 10 excess messages a week.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




RE: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Peterson


 Agreed entirely. I was thinking purely of hardware support; software
 support IME is always and everywhere a complete waste of time
 and money.

I have encountered good software support with applications that:
a) Cost over 20 grand
and/or
b) Are not widely used

I think there are lots of companies that make stuff like ultrasound imaging
software for examining stress patterns in heavy machinery (or whatever),
where the company has maybe sold 100 copies of the software across the whole
world for 250k a pop. This software often has very good support. It's a
whole world away from the mass software market we have to deal with.

I've encountered good support for Veritas' Netbackup package, but again we
were paying about 6k / annum for the support contract.


 And then people wonder why I like open source...

Even within OS software there's good support and bad support. There's plenty
of OS software that _doesn't_ have helpful user groups, and has very poor
documentation and so on.




Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

I suppose at this point I should point out that it was I that subscribed
mail-archive.com's bot to the list. Not sure when, but looking at the
archive, it seems to be roughly end of September 2000. (See
http://www.mail-archive.com/london-list%40happyfunball.pm.org/mail5.html .)

Since I confirmed the subscription from my work address rather than as
'archive@jab.org', it went past Jonathan Stowe. He wasn't exactly
enthusiastic about it, but still approved the subscription.

alex wrote:
 it's also about atmosphere.  i don't like contributing to a friendly,
 discussive list that's archived and searchable by anyone who 
 happens to drop by.  mutual trust is a valuable thing.

This is one of the main points he made -- that (some|many|most) people
wouldn't post so freely to a discussion list if they knew their words would
be archived for posterity.

I thought it would be a convenient thing to have around. I apologise if I
hurt anybody in doing this. I'll offer to unsubscribe the archiver bot from
the list if that's the consensus (though I'm sure others could do so as
easily -- it would be more of a token or symbolic thing for me to do it).

Flames to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Cheers,
Philip
-- 
Philip Newton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Robin Houston wrote:
 I assume that someone deliberately added mail-archive's bot to the
 list, because mail-archive certainly don't hunt down lists themselves.

Yes. See my other post.

 If we have an explicit "no public archives" policy then presumably
 people will have the decency to honour it, and not subscrive archive
 bots to the list.

What he said. Sorry again if this was, in fact, the case; I didn't perceive
it that way at the time.

Cheers,
Philip



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Roger Burton West

On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:08:22PM -, Jonathan Peterson typed:

 And then people wonder why I like open source...
Even within OS software there's good support and bad support. There's plenty
of OS software that _doesn't_ have helpful user groups, and has very poor
documentation and so on.

Oh, agreed entirely. The key thing is that nobody _expects_ a professional
support service, so they're less disappointed when it doesn't happen.

R



Re: List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd))

2001-01-26 Thread Robin Houston

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 07:02:48AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote:
 I wonder what mail-archive would do if we just unsubbed their bot?

Nothing, presumably.

I don't think that mail-archive subbed their bot to the list -
I think someone from here must have done it. They seem like a
decent bunch, and don't seem to be the types to actively search
out lists.

 .robin.



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Richard Clamp wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:35AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote:
  * Richard Clamp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
   That said I would have liked to have been informed of it when subscribing to
   the list (or for those of us that have been here for donkeys, when it
   started getting archived,) just so that I could be sure it was happening.
 
  how about if we notified the list everytime someone subscribed or 
  unsubscribed
 
 Eh, don't quite follow.
 

I think the point is that the circumstance of this list being archived
without people knowing about it would not have arisen - well they could
ignore the message but they would have no excuse for not knowing.  People
can then make their own choices.  It also addresses the issue that some
people have raised that of course being a public list anyone could be
subscribed : your boss, your mother, Keith Hallawell ...

I will do this if no-one objects as I think its quite a good idea.  I
think that the list is already archived will defeat any provacy arguments.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Steve Mynott


This is really sysadminy stuff and probably off topic but here I go:-

Michael Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff
 I didn't know about?

Kickstart is RedHat

http://wwwcache.ja.net/dev/kickstart/KickStart-HOWTO.html

Jumpstart is Solaris
 
Both are automated install procedures.

 If it is just a solaris thing, I was holding up solaris boxes as being
 GOOD because they don't come with much stuff installed. For servers,
 I see this as a desirable feature.

Whatever system I use (linux or solaris) I find they come with far too
much stuff installed.  Solaris is a bad offender as well with Thai X
Windows fonts and that CDE junk as well.  No I don't want power
management or true-type fonts on a server thank you Mr Joy.

Any system, irrespective of OS or distribution, I tend to totally
strip down out of all junk.  Binary package managers [1] tend to help a
lot with this (yes RPM can be good especially the -e flag). 

This is what the Hells Angels did with their Harleys, strip them
("chop") down the bare essentials before starting work.

I then customise them by installing all the real GNU programs (and
checking all the configuration options before building) you need like
emacs, rcs, gcc, perl etc (and the DJB stuff) under /usr/local and
killing that evil inetd program (a nice simple way of securing your
system).

If you follow this then you should be able to make a useable UNIX
system from any system (maybe even SCO if you were that insane).

[1] My main gripe with *BSD is lack of binary package management

-- 
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]

if we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research,
would it?  - albert einstein



Re: List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd ))

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Philip Newton wrote:
 AFAIK they just take incoming posts and if they look like 
 they come from a list, they're stuff in that list's archive
 (which is created if necessary).

And you can even create your own archive, as long as mail sent to it looks
sort of like list mail. See
http://www.mail-archive.com/pne-archive%40newton.digitalspace.net/ , for
example, which I set up for myself. It has an odd collection of posts,
including "99 bottles of beer" in Lingua::Romana::Perligata. I used a
forwarding address @newton.digitalspace.net which forwards to
archive@jab.org -- to the archiver, it looked like a list and it was filed
under that address.

Cheers,
Philip



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Robin Houston wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:50:59AM -0500, Dave Cross wrote:
  
  This is all a fine plan, but it doesn't prevent external people from
  achiving us in the same way that mail-archive do. I really don't think
  there's a foolproof way to prevent it.
 
 I doubt that's a serious problem.
 
 I assume that someone deliberately added mail-archive's bot to the
 list, because mail-archive certainly don't hunt down lists themselves.
 
 If we have an explicit "no public archives" policy then presumably
 people will have the decency to honour it, and not subscrive archive
 bots to the list.
 

I must admit that I could have spotted this if I had known what I was
looking for - I dont tend to pay much attention to the subscribe messages.
The idea of posting new subscriptions/unsubs to the list will mean that
these things will be spotted.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:16:52PM +, Steve Mynott wrote:

There's very little off-topic on this list :)

 Kickstart is RedHat
 
 http://wwwcache.ja.net/dev/kickstart/KickStart-HOWTO.html
 
 Jumpstart is Solaris
  
 Both are automated install procedures.

Yes. I have learnt.

  If it is just a solaris thing, I was holding up solaris boxes as being
  GOOD because they don't come with much stuff installed. For servers,
  I see this as a desirable feature.
 
 Whatever system I use (linux or solaris) I find they come with far too
 much stuff installed.  Solaris is a bad offender as well with Thai X
 Windows fonts and that CDE junk as well.  No I don't want power
 management or true-type fonts on a server thank you Mr Joy.

My only install of solaris has been on a 486, but IIRC you get a decent
amount of flexibility over what does, and does not, go in.

 Any system, irrespective of OS or distribution, I tend to totally
 strip down out of all junk.  Binary package managers [1] tend to help a
 lot with this (yes RPM can be good especially the -e flag). 
 
 This is what the Hells Angels did with their Harleys, strip them
 ("chop") down the bare essentials before starting work.
 
 I then customise them by installing all the real GNU programs (and
 checking all the configuration options before building) you need like
 emacs, rcs, gcc, perl etc (and the DJB stuff) under /usr/local and
 killing that evil inetd program (a nice simple way of securing your
 system).
 If you follow this then you should be able to make a useable UNIX
 system from any system (maybe even SCO if you were that insane).

This is reminding me of our talk of the ROPE thing - drop in packages
that turn any system into something usable for a particular application.

 [1] My main gripe with *BSD is lack of binary package management

It's been a while since I BSD'd much, but I definately remember installing
binary packages for many things on OpenBSD.

Michael



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Jonathan Stowe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 
 If no-one objects I will put this in place this weekend.  I guess it will
 result in ~ 10 excess messages a week.
 

with current volumen, this is a drop in the pond

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Philip Newton

Jonathan Stowe wrote:
 I must admit that I could have spotted this if I had known what I was
 looking for - I dont tend to pay much attention to the 
 subscribe messages.

You did spot it. I remember you mailed me about it saying you weren't too
keen on the idea but approved the subscription anyway. (Though this may not
have been for the hfb list but rather the later dircon.co.uk lists.)

Cheers
Philip



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Philip Newton wrote:

 I suppose at this point I should point out that it was I that subscribed
 mail-archive.com's bot to the list. Not sure when, but looking at the
 archive, it seems to be roughly end of September 2000. (See
 http://www.mail-archive.com/london-list%40happyfunball.pm.org/mail5.html .)
 
 Since I confirmed the subscription from my work address rather than as
 'archive@jab.org', it went past Jonathan Stowe. He wasn't exactly
 enthusiastic about it, but still approved the subscription.
 

I must have been drinking more than usual at that point as I have no
recollection - but yes Philip is correct I did approve the subscription as
my approval mailbox points out to me.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Rob Partington

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Steve Mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 [1] My main gripe with *BSD is lack of binary package management

Um, then what's this?

  pkg_add ftp://ftp.plig.org/pub/OpenBSD/2.8/packages/i386/dia-0.86p1.tgz

That installed a precompiled binary of dia for me. Or do you mean that,
say, pkg_* don't have the same functionality as RPM?
-- 
rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/



government overthowing Re: List Archive ( was SUBSCRIBE london-list archive@jab.org (fwd))

2001-01-26 Thread Steve Mynott

James Powell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Phew, just missed my 29th Sept post where I detailed my plans for
 a perl script to overthrow the government.

I actually think this would be possible if you ported either

http://anoncvs.aldigital.co.uk/lucre/

or 

http://www.unicorn.com/pgp/mm-readme.html

And, this is the hard bit, got everyone to use them...

-- 
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
one page principle:
a specification that will not fit on one page of 8.5x11 inch
paper cannot be understood.
-- mark ardis



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Philip Newton wrote:

 Jonathan Stowe wrote:
  I must admit that I could have spotted this if I had known what I was
  looking for - I dont tend to pay much attention to the 
  subscribe messages.
 
 You did spot it. I remember you mailed me about it saying you weren't too
 keen on the idea but approved the subscription anyway. (Though this may not
 have been for the hfb list but rather the later dircon.co.uk lists.)
 

Total failure of recall.  Yes I did.   


/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread David Cantrell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:16:46PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:

 On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
 
  how about if we notified the list everytime someone subscribed or 
  unsubscribed
 
 This can be done ver', ver' easily - It would also have the positive
 benefit of breaking the ice for nervous lurkers.
 
 If no-one objects I will put this in place this weekend.  I guess it will
 result in ~ 10 excess messages a week.

FWIW, I would rather not receive such messages.  I already get enough
subscription/unsubscription notices.  However, if you put in a suitable
header I can have procmail kill them for me.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

   Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Richard Clamp

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:27:02PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:00:24PM +, Richard Clamp wrote:
 
  Personally I like to be able to get mbox archives in preference to web
  archives, but then I like my mail client much more than my web broswer.
 
 Same here.  I'm starting to archive all the lists I serve.  With archives
 on webpages, protected by passwords.  The archives are stored in mbox
 format with no pretty printing whatsoever.

Woohoo :)

  Richard - hoarder, with no use of a web archive anyhow :)
 
 Got a complete archive of this list?  I don't but would like.

Not complete, but I think I subscribed pretty early.  The earliest post I
have is: fx sound="rummage"/ 

 From: "Cross, David" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: "'London.pm List'" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:14:38 +0100
 Subject: [london_pm] FW: [london_pm] Arranging a date for the meet.

And I think I have all to this point in time.

Maybe I should bounce them all to the mailing-lists.com archiver?

-- 
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Steve Mynott

Rob Partington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 That installed a precompiled binary of dia for me. Or do you mean that,
 say, pkg_* don't have the same functionality as RPM?

It has the same (or similar functionality) but its database isn't
complete because it doesn't include _every_ system file.

-- 
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]

i didn't have time to write a short letter, so i wrote a long one instead.
  -- mark twain



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Rob Partington

In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Steve Mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 On RedHat I can do something like 'rpm -e sendmail' to clean up before
 installing qmail and, alas, I can't do this on OpenBSD (although there
 has been talk of extending the binary packages to include the base
 OS).

If you install the postfix package, you get a script which switches your
system mailer between postfix and sendmail.  Much nicer than "rpm -e",
because if you then don't get on with postfix, just run postfix-disable
and you get sendmail back.
-- 
rob partington % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://lynx.browser.org/



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Steve Mynott

Rob Partington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
 Steve Mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  On RedHat I can do something like 'rpm -e sendmail' to clean up before
  installing qmail and, alas, I can't do this on OpenBSD (although there
  has been talk of extending the binary packages to include the base
  OS).
 
 If you install the postfix package, you get a script which switches your
 system mailer between postfix and sendmail.  Much nicer than "rpm -e",
 because if you then don't get on with postfix, just run postfix-disable
 and you get sendmail back.

I don't want to have to install another MTA in order to remove the
existing one, what if I don't want one installed at all?

I would rather have a single line command able to remove any arbitary
package of system files (like the supplied Perl to replace by your
own?) than what you describe, which isn't a general solution to this
problem but rather a feature of one program.

IMO a proper binary package manager is still nicer because it also
allows you to easily list and verify each file in the bundle against a
checksum database.

-- 
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED]

i installed two way mirrors in his pad in brentwood. and he'd come to
the door in a dress.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 01:59:09PM +, Steve Mynott wrote:
 Rob Partington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
  In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
  Steve Mynott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
   On RedHat I can do something like 'rpm -e sendmail' to clean up before
   installing qmail and, alas, I can't do this on OpenBSD (although there
   has been talk of extending the binary packages to include the base
   OS).
  
  If you install the postfix package, you get a script which switches your
  system mailer between postfix and sendmail.  Much nicer than "rpm -e",
  because if you then don't get on with postfix, just run postfix-disable
  and you get sendmail back.

Under FreeBSD, you've got sendmail-wrapper instead, which you can
configure to point to any installed file.

 I don't want to have to install another MTA in order to remove the
 existing one, what if I don't want one installed at all?
 
 I would rather have a single line command able to remove any arbitary
 package of system files (like the supplied Perl to replace by your
 own?) than what you describe, which isn't a general solution to this
 problem but rather a feature of one program.

 IMO a proper binary package manager is still nicer because it also
 allows you to easily list and verify each file in the bundle against a
 checksum database.

That's all very well and binary orientated to say, but on a BSD system,
you tend to use source updates, period.  And then the packages database
gets out of date, because the source code has been rebuilt, and
reinstalled.  It's doable, but there are tricky issues involved,
such as trying to integrate it into the BSD build system (and make world
takes long enough already!).

It is desirable, however; one often complained of thing is that it's not
easy enough to remove sendmail/perl from the system when freshly
installed.

-Dom



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:08:22PM -, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
 I've encountered good support for Veritas' Netbackup package, but again we
 were paying about 6k / annum for the support contract.

Lucky you!  I spit on the earth that NetBackup walks on!  It's one of
the worst packages I've ever had the misfortune to go near.  I spent 6
months trying to integrate it with a legacy system at a previous job.
Hopeless.

Apologies for the rant, I have a Netbackup twitch.

-Dom



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Dave Cross

At Fri, 26 Jan 2001 12:44:31 +, Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Got a complete archive of this list?  I don't but would like.
 
 Not complete, but I think I subscribed pretty early.  The earliest 
 post I have is: fx sound="rummage"/ 
 
  From: "Cross, David" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: "'London.pm List'" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 10:14:38 +0100
  Subject: [london_pm] FW: [london_pm] Arranging a date for the meet.

Bloody hell. makelist - there's a blast from the past :)

 And I think I have all to this point in time.

I've had a couple of mail disasters which have meant me losing the 
odd days-worth here or there, but I'm pretty sure I've got all of the
really early ones. I've even got the ones where it was just me CCing
a bunch of people.

 Maybe I should bounce them all to the mailing-lists.com archiver?

Surely you jest :)

Dave...



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread David Cantrell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 03:37:38PM +, Jonathan Stowe wrote:

 I still have the original mail that Dave sent out somewhere ...

Show off!

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

   Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Mark Fowler

Dave Cross wibbled:

 The other week I dug out the original comp.lang.perl.misc post.

I think I have a recording of someone bashing a stick near a big black
rectangle somewhere too...

Is this a collective attempt to crash mail archiving bots by posting so
much that they get overloaded and fall over? ;-)

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/'   ,
   Email = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone = '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )








Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Mark Fowler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
 Dave Cross wibbled:
 
  The other week I dug out the original comp.lang.perl.misc post.
 
 I think I have a recording of someone bashing a stick near a big black
 rectangle somewhere too...
 
 Is this a collective attempt to crash mail archiving bots by posting so
 much that they get overloaded and fall over? ;-)
 

they wouldn't fall over if ..

they were written using java on a windows platform and using
DB2 as the database

;-)

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Greg Cope

Redvers Davies wrote:
 
  Would this still hold for a RedDrat system with all the X stuff and
  other unncessary stuff removed ?
 
 Nah, ou want slackware A, N and D... No more. 10 meg for your base
 OS, compile what you need.

Stop IT ... I am not using slackware !

Greg



RE: Stupid Email

2001-01-26 Thread Matthews Simon

  
  Don't listen to this man.  His job title may include the 
  word "manager"
  but he never has or never will be a "manager" in this context.  He's
  far too intelligent for a start :-)=

Too kind. I usually have to blow my own trumpet.  It's always nice to have
someone else blow it for you :-)


SAM





Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Redvers Davies

 Under FreeBSD, you've got sendmail-wrapper instead, which you can
 configure to point to any installed file.

Linux has that too - its called a symbolic link:

tonkatsu:~# ls -al /usr/lib/sendmail /usr/sbin/sendmail
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   18 Dec  9  1998 /usr/lib/sendmail - 
/usr/exim/bin/exim
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root   18 Dec  9  1998 /usr/sbin/sendmail - 
/usr/exim/bin/exim




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Redvers Davies

 Stop IT ... I am not using slackware !

Ans why not??  For a server it is perfect.  Very small, very compact.
Perfect for a secure environment.



RE: Stupid Email

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Matthews Simon wrote:

   
   Don't listen to this man.  His job title may include the 
   word "manager"
   but he never has or never will be a "manager" in this context.  He's
   far too intelligent for a start :-)=
 
 Too kind. I usually have to blow my own trumpet.  It's always nice to have
 someone else blow it for you :-)
 

Look this is a family list 

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Dominic Mitchell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 05:19:08PM +, Redvers Davies wrote:
  Stop IT ... I am not using slackware !
 
 Ans why not??  For a server it is perfect.  Very small, very compact.
 Perfect for a secure environment.

Is that why slackware.com got broken into a few weeks ago then?  :-)

-Dom



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Redvers Davies

 Is that why slackware.com got broken into a few weeks ago then?  :-)

I'm not going to rise to that at all as you know full well that the
security of a product has more to do with its installation, configuration
and maintainence than the code.  Regardless of supplier, if the admin does
not lock down hir box and keep up to date on security issues it doesn't
matter WHO wrote the software.

Red



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton

Roger Burton West [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*On or about Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:08:22PM -, Jonathan Peterson typed:
*
* And then people wonder why I like open source...
*Even within OS software there's good support and bad support. There's plenty
*of OS software that _doesn't_ have helpful user groups, and has very poor
*documentation and so on.
*
*Oh, agreed entirely. The key thing is that nobody _expects_ a professional
*support service, so they're less disappointed when it doesn't happen.

I don't think this is true for the great majority of software end-users
out there. They expect documentation and some sort of answer/FAQ whatnot
to their questions and those that don't have the bare minimum will
probably fail in the public arena.

Heck, people are disappointed when you do help them but give them an
answer they don't want to hear.

e.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:40:13AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
 *Oh, agreed entirely. The key thing is that nobody _expects_ a professional
 *support service, so they're less disappointed when it doesn't happen.
 I don't think this is true for the great majority of software end-users
 out there. They expect documentation and some sort of answer/FAQ whatnot
 to their questions and those that don't have the bare minimum will
 probably fail in the public arena.

Can anyone point to actual studies of the "we took some end users, and
found they wanted FOO amounts of documentation". And, for completeness,
"we took some end users, looked at what they were actually using, and
then looked at how much documentation was available for those products"?

Michael



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton

Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*I personally would have just as little faith in Solaris run by someone
*who didn't know what they were doing as I would in Redhat run by
*someone who didn't know what they were doing.

I would have more faith in Solaris. On an acadmeic network, no firewalls,
we had user workstations that pretty much lived on their own and at the
mercy of their users. One day, one of the AI profs installed RedHat after
most of us had left the computing dept...we heard that someone hacked into
said linux box and sniffed the entire dept. passwords. 

perhaps Linux gives people a sense of adventure or something, but Solaris
in the last few years has become quite good at running well in spite of
the chimps at the keyboard. 

*How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
*someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
*as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
*with solaris?

I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very
interested to run and compare the results.

e.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton

Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Can anyone point to actual studies of the "we took some end users, and
*found they wanted FOO amounts of documentation". And, for completeness,
*"we took some end users, looked at what they were actually using, and
*then looked at how much documentation was available for those products"?

I don't think one needs a ream of useless statistics to explain why
publishers like ORA, Manning, etc. are selling a lot of books, er
documentation these days. People like to possess if not also read
documentation.

Software with good documentation indicates a certain level of
professionalism. Can you imagine how (un)popular mySQL would be without
the manual? I use it so often I had the sucker printed and bound. Whether
or not one uses the docs is not the point, having it available and current
it. 

Imagine Perl without the copius amount of docs..

e.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton

Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff
*I didn't know about?

Jumpstart. 

e.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Greg Cope

Redvers Davies wrote:
 
  Stop IT ... I am not using slackware !
 
 Ans why not??  For a server it is perfect.  Very small, very compact.
 Perfect for a secure environment.

Only joking - I'm used to redhat - I might move to Debian  who knows
?

I am quite happy with redhat / debian as I know what I am getting - I
hate solaris's lame install that means you have to install all the GNU
stuff, adjust your path, man path etc   Slackware is a middle
ground.

Greg



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:00AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
 Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
 *I personally would have just as little faith in Solaris run by someone
 *who didn't know what they were doing as I would in Redhat run by
 *someone who didn't know what they were doing.
 I would have more faith in Solaris. On an acadmeic network, no firewalls,
 we had user workstations that pretty much lived on their own and at the
 mercy of their users. One day, one of the AI profs installed RedHat after
 most of us had left the computing dept...we heard that someone hacked into
 said linux box and sniffed the entire dept. passwords. 

Were the solaris boxes setup by the same people who setup the redhat boxes
tho, or were two different people adminning them?

The scenario I'm guessing is:

a) solaris workstations setup by sysadmin, left on their own. users
don't have root.

b) redhat box setup by AI prof, left on own. users don't have root.

But that's just my guess from common practice at the university I've
attended. If this *is* the case, and the sysadmins have more experience
than the AI prof, the two cases aren't comparable, because they don't
both not know what they're doing.

 perhaps Linux gives people a sense of adventure or something, but Solaris
 in the last few years has become quite good at running well in spite of
 the chimps at the keyboard. 

I'm working on the theory that everybody gets root exploits. Therefore,
no matter what it is, if you don't patch it for 6 months / a year,
it'll be exploitable.

We need a decent way to work out the difference between "box A is more
hackable than box B", and "box A is more likely to get hacked than box B,
due the type of exploits people tend to try". I suspect without detailed
evidence skr1pt k1dd1es are more likely to go for redhat. 

Redhat is perhaps more likely to have security bugs spotted due to (I'm
guessing here), more installations in the world. Perhaps not.

I certainly have a *perception* more security issues are found in redhat
than in most other linux and unix (eg solaris) distributions.

And can't we have an discussion about which OS is best without bashing
a particular one all time? [1]

 *How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
 *someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
 *as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
 *with solaris?
 I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very
 interested to run and compare the results.

I'm not interested in performance numbers. No. I like. I *am* interested
in performance numbers, but not right now. And I'm fairly sure big sun
boxes go significantly bigger and better than big pcs. This is one of the
advantages of Sun.

More interesting would be stuff like "redhat gets x security problems per
year, solaris has y problems", "we see x exploit attempts specific to
redhat, y specific to solaris", "on this metric of well-adminstered-ness,
these sets of sun boxes were found to have these numbers. this other set
of redhat boxes were found to have these other numbers".

I suspect a number of these issues could be found by someone reading bugtraq
more carefully than I do - I remember some of these types of stats being
discussed.

Michael

[1] Ok, yes, most of us suck here when the other OS is windows.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
 Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
 *Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff
 *I didn't know about?
 Jumpstart. 

yes, I found that out, my memory sucks.



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Dave Hodgkinson

Dominic Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Yes, don't forget that symbolic links originated in BSD, thank you.  :-)

Don't forget that pretty much everything of any use in Unix came out
of Berkely! I spit on your system V IPC, I want my select()...

-- 
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star   http://www.deep-purple.com
  Apache, mod_perl, MySQL, Sybase hired gun for, well, hire
  -



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Michael Stevens

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 06:04:07PM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
 On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:00AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
  Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:

I take that post back. I don't think it would be productive to
continue the discussion.

Michael



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread David Cantrell

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:50:00AM -0600, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:

 I would have more faith in Solaris. On an acadmeic network, no firewalls,
 we had user workstations that pretty much lived on their own and at the
 mercy of their users. One day, one of the AI profs installed RedHat after
 most of us had left the computing dept...we heard that someone hacked into
 said linux box and sniffed the entire dept. passwords. 

And yet this is not Linux's fault.  It is the fault of:
  the person who set it up wrongly in the first place
  the network people for making their network so vulnerable to this
sort of predictable stupidity

 *How about a decently built rack mount PC running Debian[1], by
 *someone who actually knows how to setup that particular OS decently,
 *as compared with a Sun box running Solaris setup by someone good
 *with solaris?
 
 I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very
 interested to run and compare the results.

Benchmarks aren't particularly useful.

-- 
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/

   Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Elaine -HFB- Ashton

David Cantrell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
*
*And yet this is not Linux's fault.  It is the fault of:
*  the person who set it up wrongly in the first place
*  the network people for making their network so vulnerable to this
*sort of predictable stupidity

OpenBSD hasn't had a exploitable base install in years. They would
probably have a different view as I would. A firewall doesn't replace
reasonable host-based security. Besides, this was academia where one would
be happy to have a computer at all, much less a firewall. Although, I must
admit ATM to the desktop was rather swank. 

RedHat has been sloppy for years and it's no amazing wonder that people
without a lot of experience who install these boxes threaten compromise to
networks and others around them. If it's so predictable then, why not fix
it. This was a world famous AI prof who just wanted a linux box to play
with on his desk and did nothing more than install it from cd as I recall.
Granted, when I worked there we wouldn't have allowed him to install it
without an audit of some sort, but still, I find that to be a sloppy way
to go about distributing a product that is so vulnerable with a base
install. 

* I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very
* interested to run and compare the results.
*
*Benchmarks aren't particularly useful.

:) No they aren't, but it would be amusing to see just how Debian
compared.

e.



Re: Mailing List Archive

2001-01-26 Thread Greg McCarroll

* Mark Fowler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
   I sez:
  
   Is this a collective attempt to crash mail archiving bots by posting so
   much that they get overloaded and fall over? ;-)
   
  
  Then grep sez:
 
  they wouldn't fall over if ..
  
  they were written using java on a windows platform and using
  DB2 as the database
  
  ;-)
 
 Depends if the list was is set to munge reply-to or not really, doesn't
 it.  And we know this kind of stuff only happens on the first thurday (not
 the day after the first wednesday) of the month.
 

i'd love to chat about this, but i've got some goats going over my bridge
at 9

-- 
Greg McCarroll  http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Jonathan Stowe

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:

 I have a farm of suns, if you want to make a benchmark, I'll be very
 interested to run and compare the results.
 

I have three E250s running Informix in my hareem, the only time those
suckers have broken is when someone broke the database server.

/J\
-- 
Jonathan Stowe   |   
http://www.gellyfish.com |   I'm with Grep on this one 
http://www.tackleway.co.uk   |




Re: Technical Meeting Venues

2001-01-26 Thread Mark Fowler

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Dave Cross wrote:

 How do people feel about going back to State51? Does someone want to 
 contact the ICA?

Hmm.  No one seems to have replied to this[1].  I think the lack of
response seems to indicate that no-one has any objections to either
venue.  I personally thought State51 was very good, but I'm all for
variety in the venue.

What kind of deal were the ICA offering us?
 
 Any other suggestions?

nitpick
Yeah, the web site sez that technical meetings are bi-monthly.  Shouldn't
we change this as they're only monthly (though half way though the month.)
/nitpick

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/'   ,
   Email = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone = '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )








Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Paul Makepeace

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 10:42:16AM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
 Multi processor Solaris runs rings around any of the free Unixes.
 They've had kernel threads for nearly 10 years, and it's very optimized.

Hmm, last time I checked Solaris threads were a nightmare...

 I suspect that SGIs IRIX is equally good, but I have no experience of
 that to speak from.

RIP IRIX :)

YMMV,
Paul

 
 -Dom



Re: Sun's Perl was Re: Application servers and e-commerce platforms

2001-01-26 Thread Paul Makepeace

On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 02:33:54PM +, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
 Under FreeBSD, you've got sendmail-wrapper instead, which you can
 configure to point to any installed file.

Debian has generalised this in /etc/alternatives,


$ ls -l /etc/alternatives/ | head -6
total 1
-rw-r--r--1 root root  100 Nov  6 18:18 README
lrwxrwxrwx1 root root   33 Sep 20 17:35 WindowMaker - 
/usr/X11R6/bin/WindowMaker-debian
lrwxrwxrwx1 root root   16 Nov 14 17:43 a2p - /usr/bin/a2p-5.6
lrwxrwxrwx1 root root   33 Nov 14 17:43 a2p.1p.gz - 
/usr/share/man/man1/a2p-5.6.1p.gz
lrwxrwxrwx1 root root   28 Sep 20 17:35 asclock - 
/usr/X11R6/bin/asclock-24bpp
$

Paul



Re: TPC5

2001-01-26 Thread Chris Benson

On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 12:08:04PM +, David Cantrell wrote:
 
 Good point.  Sometimes it's hard to remember that there is life outside
 the M25.  Errm ... if you *really* want to have it in the UK, consider
 manchester and birmingham.  Both have international airports, large hotels
 and conference centres.  I expect Edinburgh does too although I'm not sure
 if there are direct flights to .us - but that's OK, there's no direct
 flights from .eu to Monterey :-)

And NCL (Newcastle) has 6 flights/day to Schiphol (a way better hub than
any of the London 'ports) and a *much* better QoL ... but it's a looong
way from the money.

And of course the Metro won't be on strike 3 Mondays in February either!
-- 
Chris Benson
- who needs to get to Liverpool St. for 0830 Monday 19th Feb :-(tm)



Re: Technical Meeting Venues

2001-01-26 Thread Natalie Ford

At 23:11 26/01/01, you wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Dave Cross wrote:

  How do people feel about going back to State51? Does someone want to
  contact the ICA?

Hmm.  No one seems to have replied to this[1].

[1] ?

I have replied to this, off list, because the preferences I expressed were 
personal and medical...  ;-)

Natalie




Re: Stupid Email

2001-01-26 Thread Chris Benson

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 11:58:14AM +, Michael Stevens wrote:
 On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 11:32:58AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
  There was a moral in this story but I forgot it in the process of
  rambling on.  Probably something about munging Reply-To, or putting
  all middle management up against a wall and shooting them (which ICL
  did a short while later).
 
 Was this simple yet violent process found to be of benefit to the
 company?

Probably, but some were left behind and bred - ICL is still haemoraging - 
but it sure screwed up a certain small software house that employed
one of these walking dead: e.g. Two weeks to write a memo to describe
what preparation was needed before he could start doing the job he was
employed to do!
-- 
Chris Benson



Re: Technical Meeting Venues

2001-01-26 Thread Mark Fowler

 [1] ?

Ooops, I know there was something I'd missed off the bottom of the
message.  That'll teach me to watch TV, eat, use irc, and post at the same
time

[1] Unless I've missed it due to the large amount of mail, or someone has
replied off off list.
 
 I have replied to this, off list, because the preferences I expressed were 
 personal and medical...  ;-)

Fairy Nuff.  Speaking from a personal standpoint, I really enjoy the
technical meetings and think more of them would be really beneficial[2].  I
think they represent a lot of what we are us to and show that we're all
not just talk 'n booze.  Hence I'm anxious to see them succeed.

If not any of the venues discussed then where?  If we need another venue
then someone should look into it[4] asap, and we can see what we can do.

Later.

Mark.

[2] Bath.pm roots showing.  We used to discuss a fair amount of technical
(but not necessary perl related) stuff.  From this, I quickly progressed
into the well rounded perl programmer I am today[3]

[3] How well rounded is a matter of opinion.  Let's just say I wouldn't be
a scratch on what I am now without them.

[4] Which I'd do, but I'm not entirely sure how to go about.  Let's just
say that I've got my cow in the ditch here, and thus would be willing to
look into it if no-one else can come up with better suggestions.

-- 
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/'   ,
   Email = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',   Phone = '+44 (0) 20 7700 9960'  )