Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * * The modules list is a bit out of date in this case (I'm at eight)... * *And, of course, not all modules on CPAN are in the module list *(see, for example, Symbol::Approx::Sub). It's not out of date. It's generated whenever there is an update to the modlist since it is just another representation of that list. If your modules aren't in the list then you need to submit it to Andreas. http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/pod/perlnewmod.html#Step_by_step_Distributing_your_module describes how this is done. e.
Dave Hodgkinson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *I can't find the incantation! Help! CPAN.pm has an autobundle feature that comes in handy for this. Make an autobundle then use it to update all the modules you like. http://www.cpan.org/misc/cpan-faq.html#How_installed_modules show the use of ExtUtils::Installed which I use quite a lot for such things and the question following it also shows how to use autobundle. enjoy, e.
Robin Szemeti [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * * What IS the mentality of idiots who attack community sites * like this? * *maybe it was just a script kiddie .. maybe it was a worm. It wasn't anything quite so dignified. I had reinstalled the Catalog module last month after a failed attempt to upgrade it and at the time I didn't notice it had made the .conf files group writeable. At some point within 30 mins of whomever this was deciding to overwrite the file broke the catalog but not the rest of the box. I suggest that anyone else using the Catalog module check their installation just for good measure. So, it was a trivial stupid thing that are usually the cause of such problems though it didn't make my day to hear this news before I had my first cup of coffee which may explain the note that was up on the front page for a while. Nothing was damaged or compromised save my ego :) And, as far as the idiots go, I doubt there are any fewer today then there were yesterday. e.
Dominic Mitchell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *AFAIK, the starfire (Sun Ultra Enterprise 1) only goes up to 64 *processors (I used to work on an under equipped one ;-) The SGI *challenge does 128 procs, though. The starfile does, indeed, max out at 16 boards with 4 processors each making 64 processors in total. It also has a cap of 64 GB ram. *Sorry, but I have no experience of SQL server worth mentioning, just *Oracle. Although the starfire had 6Gb of RAM in the place I used to *work at, it still ran like treacle. But I'm no DBA, so there's probably *a very good reason for it doing this. Yeah, probably someone was a cheap bastard after buying the E10k. One of the major US broadcasting companies used to run their website on a couple of U2s with 512mb ram and a NFS mounted filesystem with Oracle..and let us not forget them using FrontPage for collaborative design. Buying fast hardware is only one part of the solution. If the E10k was slow it was most certainly due to bad system operation desgin and a human who didn't connect the dots and follow the slow I/O. * The ultrasparc was still stuck at 400Mhz last I looked... Look again. The UltraSparc-III is at 750Mhz and up. e.
Paul Mison [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *On 29/05/2001 at 18:04 +0100, Yeoh Yiu wrote: *So have you seen _Center of the World_ yet ? * *Nah, 'cos it's not out here yet. No release date is listed on IMDB. *Salon didn't like it, though: Salon has good taste too. Sucked harder than watching the queen mum on Ascot Day. Boring and torporific well beyond my low expectations for the movie. Go see Shrek instead. e.
Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *I disagree. IMO, posting a link to site containing pirate copies of books *_is_ advocating piracy. YMMV. In a world that advocates Napster, this is no different. Someone buys a copy of the book, scans it in and shares it with the world. Outrage by the author is not any different than outrage by a musical artist. There was an interesting interview with Bill Joy at the P2P conference iirc that discussed this sort of piracy and Joy specifically talked about books being the most worrisome part of this type of activity/technology. The royalties are so small that I doubt if it would make any major difference in anyones bank account for the people who buy books will still buy them and the people that don't just might go out and purchase a copy. You write a book because you think there is something you know that others might benefit from as noone gets rich in this business. Why, I think Jarkko and I went to dinner once on his royalty cheque from ORA. You can't expect to steal music and then bitch about how someone is stealing copies of your book on line. e.
Paul Makepeace [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *``BOFHs will legally need licence to work'' * *http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/18866.html * *Absurd, laughable and bizarre. What *is* wrong with the UK? I interviewed for a firewall admin job at a big bank whereupon they took a microscope to the last 10+ years of my life and stopped just short of the anal probe. Had I taken the position I would have been bonded as well for insurance. I don't know how well this would apply to the rest of the rather rampantly variable systems security market but banks have already been doing it for years...no big deal there. As a wise Rabbi once said, Trust is knowing exactly what someone will do and, with a 10+ year background check, you've got a pretty good idea or at least better than a resume that could be all inflated or exaggerated truths. It boils down to insurance probably. e.
Damian Conway [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *Ate was the goddess of folly, strife, discord, and mischief. *She was a daughter of Zeus, banished to Earth for her wickness *in leading men astray. * *Hecate was the goddess of the night, of magic, and travel at night. *She was a cousin of Zeus, and dwelt quietly in the Underworld. Hecate was the daughter of Zeus in another treatment of the history though everyone at some point was spawn of Zeus it would seem. Ate was also the daughter of Zeus. I've never seen her referred to as a cousin of Zeus...Zeus didn't leave too many family members around to produce such cousins :) She is also known as Pyrtania and the Invincible Queen. *The latter is much beloved of modern Goddess worshippers -- as the *third personification of the Goddess. They'll have your guts *(or worse!) for garters if they catch you confusing Her with *that bitch Ate ;-) None of the gods were exactly sweetness and light. Hec'ate wasn't anyone to sneer in the direction of Ate. :) e.
Dean [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *The http://hpux.connect.org.uk/ site looks like a good resource if a little *behind. What part of HP-UX didn't scream 'behind' :) *Not another mailing list... You can't make me! I'm only moving some Linux *scripts across to HPUX so i doubt I'd be much use on the list. The error *threw me since i'm too new to this to know Perl 4. Sadly, the list isn't terribly active but, depending on the platform, vendor specific lists can be very useful in such situations. e.
Piers Cawley [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *Certainly from the play I had with it at Neil's, it looks pretty good. *Now, if I can just get someone to give me a G4 Titanium PowerBook I'll *actually have something to run on it. I have a Ti book and it seems resource hungry even on that. It consumes 2GB of disk space which even solaris hasn't managaed to do yet. I have 380+ MB RAM and I find it very slow on launching OS 9 or 'classic' applications and my mouse pointer goes missing every now and then when it wakes up from sleep. I still find most GUIs cumbersome so OS X has done nothing for me to dissuade me from thinking I'd be happier with NetBSD. I find the urge to lick the screen most disturbing. Until there are more compelling reasons to use OS X, other than it looks smart on your desktop, I don't think it will be very readily adopted. SUSE PPC Linux installs much more easily and is faster with less candy. It will be interesting to see how OS X evolves in the next year or so. In spite of my dissatisfaction with the OS itself, I'm happy to see Apple bringing the power of unix to the desktop and I'll hope in a year or two that it will be compelling to upgrade. e.
Nathan Torkington [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *And I'd like to say that I hope O'Reilly has done nothing to promote *the confusion. We make no claims that CPAN is anything to do with us. *If you find something we've said or done that might cause that confusion, *please tell us and we'll fix it. Please stop selling perl books right away ;) I wasn't bashing ORA at all but pointing out that CPAN is not part of ORA. It's a seemingly easy and common mistake people make as ORA is the camel is everything Perl to they who don't see behind the curtain and we aren't going out of our way to dispel that misconception either since it's just a nit. There are a lot of volunteers who keep CPAN running and keep it free from banner ads and other unwanted dreck. Have you hugged your CPAN mirror admin today? :) *Saying the CPAN multiplexor here doesn't count, because Tom did that. :-) *(and I'm not sure anyone much uses it now, given that the quality of *service in CPAN mirrors is a billion times better this year than three *years ago). The multiplexor was sure cool in its day as, if I'm recalling correctly, Tom had the first or one of the very first North American mirrors and it did a good job of directing people to a nearby mirror instead of futzing with the mirror list. http://gopher.metronet.com:70/R150051-152499-1m/perlinfo/packrats/mailing-list/96 This was also done before ORA officially took stewardship of www.perl.com. I think Ask is actually working on an update to the multiplexor to make it a bit more useful in the days of crazy DNS :) e.
Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *Exclusivity! Take a good look round next time you're at a meeting and *tell me how exclusive you think we are :) * *But, yes, I have _lots_ of ideas for a revamp of the web site. I might *even have time to do it some time this year. There is also a mongers category on the lists.cpan.org page should you care to list it. e.
Robin Szemeti [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *anyone who recognises what I'm talkning about and can give a filename or *URI please put me out of my misery and remind me where it was. h2xs is the best little secret around though I will note that the new 'instant perl modules' book does actually have a small blurb about it. http://world.std.com/~swmcd/steven/perl/module_mechanics.html http://world.std.com/~swmcd/steven/perl/module_anatomy.html Steven also had these published on Perlmonth as I recall. e.
David Cantrell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *I've been approached to do some paid tech-reviewing, of a manual for a *Linux security product. I have *no* idea how I should charge for this, *or indeed how much. Does one usually do it per thousand words or *something? AW usually offers an honoraria of several hundred dollars for principal reviewers of their books which, depending on the book, could be nothing in exchange for your time if you do a lot of fact checking, etc. So, depending on the publisher, it is mostly a labour of love and not something you charge by the word. *It's basically making sure that it reads OK when translated into English *by the German authors, and requires no knowledge of the product itself, *but does - obviously - require some familiarity with the subject. Think of it as adding to the pool of quality publications and see what they are willing to offer. It really depends on the publisher. Jarkko was very impressed with the quality of the German translator who not only translated MAWP but made corrections as well and I imagine he was well paid for it but that is a different role than just skim editing. e.
Robin Szemeti [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *I know in the publishing world people do things for ludicrously samll *amounts, but thats because you can usually find a starving author that *will do it for pennies, but if you assume that they need to know at least *a little about the Linux security model then that kinda narrows it down a *bit dunnit. Well, for some of the more established academic publishers, there are a lot more than 'starving authors' :) It's academic courtesy. I misread the previoius as a book tech review for a publisher rather than a software house but I don't know that you could charge all that much more since 98% of the work is already done. e.
Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *The page for voting is at http://www.activestate.com/Awards/. Wow, it's a good thing there aren't any women nominated...someone could get hurt with those 'trophies'. Any more phallic and they'd come with batteries. Well, Dick does run ActiveState and it's Dick's award...paint it black and you could have a Genuity 'Black Rocket'you'll have to buy your own batteries. *I certainly wouldn't want to be accused of fixing the vote, but you *might be interested to know that there is a london.pm member included *in the list of nominations. It would be nice to have a blurb about what each were nominated for on the form but vote Andy as he's a swell guy :) e.
Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *"Corn syrup" still sounds like something that would taste of wheat. I *was talking to someone on a talker about this today, but they said they hadn't *found anything in the UK yet that included it, so I have no reference *whatsoever for what it is, apart from the fact I'm told it's sugary. Corn Syrup, used in place of oil, will suffice as an oil substitute *once*...meaning that once the engine is all nice and hot, it's fine while the sugar carmelises...once the engine cools however, you have a very nice worthless chunk of metal. :) *(pedantry: There *are* applications where bad programming could kill. I *don't think any of us work in them, but I'm pretty sure they exist.) Sure, but they probably aren't in the market for 'Perl for Dummies' eitheror, if they are, Darwin is going to have a good day. :) e.
Benjamin Holzman [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:57:20AM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote: * Meaning, nobody's really a complete idiot and we'd seem just as dumb * if we called brain surgery tech support, new mother tech support, or * even gardening tech support. * *True, but there aren't many people who will assume that they can perform *brain surgery just because they successfully applied a band-aid to a paper *cut the week before. True, but I don't think anyone is going to die from writing crappy CGIs v. hacking at someones grey cells with a scalpel. e.
Robin Szemeti [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *But what you say above proves my point dunnit ... these guys are nobel *laureates and they enjoy a challenge.. out there in the real world a *large percentage of the population finds adding up the money for the bus a *challenge ... the pasics of CGI are rocket science for most people. Well, this particular one was 65 years old, a consultant to world leaders in Economic affairs and was completely baffled by the advent of a new laptop. He had better things to worry about than learning something as trivial and insignificant to life on the planet earth than CGI. Almost anyone other than Webheads have better things to do than learn CGI. It doesn't make them stupid, in fact, I'd almost argue that they are the bright ones. *'regex' so ... oh I dunno .. yes its crap perl, yes its not a great work *on CGI .. but it probably achieves what it set out to do, give basic *knowledge to someone who only wnats to spend two lunchtimes on a bit of *CGI for their home page. Which is probably about 95% of the planet. Why should they care if the Perl is shoddy? The web page works :) I went hunting for a quickie DBI/CGI tutorial/template/code I could steal last December and I can pretty much vouch for there being zip in that category out there on the web for the new and the lazy to take and learn from. It's disappointing. *I dunno .. I guess there is the 'type this in like this' level and there *is the full blown 'buy a copy of Programming Perl' approach I dont see *much middle ground. It's hard to write such a book. e.
Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: *Data Munging with Perl *by David Cross * *Amazon.com Sales Rank: 760 * *Blimey, how did that happen? Yesterday it was 87,867! http://cpan.valueclick.com/authors/id/TOMC/scripts/ contains 'amarank' which is a script you can use to feed the obsession :) It's old but it should still work. e.
Nathan Torkington [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * Also L Steins Network Programming with Perl is a good book. I'm only a * chunk into it buts its a good read on its own and an even better one * if your not from a Unix background. * *Yup, it's a bloody impressive book. And it's an Addison-Wesley book :) e.
Robin Szemeti [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *i think we get a slanted view on what a 'normal level of intelligence' *is, because in general, we work with exceptional people. I spent the last I know at least 2 nobel laureates who wouldn't know jack about CGI or about selecting which book might be a better buy. Hell, I installed Microsoft BOB for one of them way back when the GUI of windows vs. the beauty of TeX was a bit much. Something new is a challenge, even if you are a rocket scientist. It's not a matter of pandering to the stupid, it's a matter of presenting the information in a format that is easy to read and understand without treating the reader to sanskrit. Of course, even the brilliant are often stupid especially when it comes to applied v. theory. The great unwashed masses of CGI are probably not the brightest bulbs, but I don't think it's so much an esoteric subject to justify such a dearth in good documentation for them. e.
Nathan Torkington [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *Hey, if she's allowed to plug, so am I :-) The 2nd edition of "CGI *Programming with Perl" (O'Reilly of course) is pretty bloody good. I *was midway through writing a CGI class when I got a tech-review copy *of the book, and it was what I was going to teach and then some more. *I like that :-) Well, anything would be an improvement over the 1st edition :D e.
Simon Wistow [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *It's terrible. Look at this particular gem of code entitled "Modifying *all the members of an array" There is a second edition in the works right now so I would encourage you to make its flaws known though I think this is a peachpit press book, not AW as the amazon.com listing says. And speaking of bad books, who is this Martin Brown guy who has a new book every month these days, certainly he must have a ghostwriter. Also, be sure to queue up for 'Instant Perl Modules', water not included. e.
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.
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, 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.
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.
Michael Stevens [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *Isn't kickstart a solaris thing, or have redhat developed new stuff *I didn't know about? Jumpstart. e.
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.
Jonathan Stowe [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * * Speaking of DNS, did we ever hear anything from the pm.org DNS people? * * *Not from my initial e-mail - I have fired off another today and hope that *we might get some action. As far as I know, Ben Hockenhull is still doing DNS for the PM box though it may take some time as things are in trasition from one place to another and DNS changes probably aren't high in the queue. e.
Dave Cross [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *So I'm looking for advice on the best distro to use. Bear in mind that *the existing box will currently become a firewall/proxy box so I'll *do all the paranoid security stuff on there. * *Go for it. Give it your best shot. * *Let battle commence. OpenBSD is the best choice for a firewall box. It's fast, small, secure and runs ona myriad of platforms. I use it at home for my firewall and have started sneaking it in at work. It's tag line is 'secure by default' and from a base installation you won't get the same from most, if not all, linux distros. This is my opinion and I'm not terribly interested in a holy war. http://www.openbsd.org/ e.
David H. Adler [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth: * *I'm not sure how I should feel about this We should make a scotch category :) e.
Had I a left nut, I would offer it in trade to go to this. If you like Everything But The Girl and/or House Music, these guys are not to be missed. Someone go so I can vicariously enjoy it :) - Forwarded message from ebtg net team [EMAIL PROTECTED] - *A LAZY DOG IS FOR LIFE NOT JUST FOR CHRISTMAS! * *Lazy Dog Christmas Eve Party @ Notting Hill Arts Club, 21 Notting Hill Gate *W11 0171 460 4459. Sunday 24 Dec 4pm - 11pm. £5 donation (free before 6pm). * *Lazy Dog ends a blazing year with the Lazy Dog Christmas Party on Sunday *December 24 (Christmas Eve) at their spiritual fortnightly home, Notting *Hill Arts Club. With a string of roadblocked nights behind them, their debut *mix compilation released worldwide on Virgin and a storming tour of North *America in November, it has been a vintage twelve months for London¹s *favourite Sunday nighter. Ben and Jay would like to thank all the Lazy *Doggers and supporters everywhere, who have helped make it rock. * *Expect more outbursts of festive pogo-ing, group hugging, ferocious Sunday *socialising, and the best electric-charged deep house around at the *capital's front-running roadblocked club night. * *--- * *Lazy Dog CD *Double CD mix compilation by Ben Watt and Jay Hannan *Features UK Club Charts No. 1 - EBTG vs. Soul Vision 'Tracey In My Room' *Out now on Virgin/Astralwerks * *³The dog¹s bollocks.² * Compilation Of The Week, 7 Magazine *³Licks to engage your utmost attention both on the floor and inside your *music lovin¹ head. Can¹t wait for Lazy Dog 2!² Time Out *³This superb deep-house mix² GQ * * * - End forwarded message -