Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really > hits your cross-platform compatibility. > You've got Socket of course :) /J\ -- Jonathan Stowe <[E

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > At 10:56 13/03/2001, you wrote: > >On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with > > > the problem at source - perl certification > > > > > > *duck* > > > > > > havin

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with > > the problem at source - perl certification > > > > *duck* > > > > having said in another email how there were

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 02:45:30PM +, Dave Cross wrote: > > We simply can't compete with Matt on backwards compatibility as his scripts > all run on 4.036! If you call that "running"... :-/ dha -- David H. Adler - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ "I was under medication wh

Re: Strange Request

Redvers Davies wrote: > Is IO::Socket cross platform? I believe so. At least, if the platform supports sockets. 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: Strange Request

> I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really > hits your cross-platform compatibility. Is IO::Socket cross platform?

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:38:52PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > > I neither know nor care. I was taking issue with your claim that relying > > > on /usr/lib/sendmail is a good idea. > > This aros

Re: Strange Request

Weee! Cascade! On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:38:52PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Philip Newton wrote: > Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published > > interface. > (As others have already written, no /usr/lib/sendmail [or /usr/lib, for that > matter] on Win2K or NT web servers.) See my replies to this... >

Re: Strange Request

David Cantrell wrote: > Alternatively, just look up the recipient's mail server and > talk SMTP to it. If you can't connect, try the backup servers. > If there aren't any, then the recipient is too lame to talk to > us. I'd suggest trying to look for an A record if there's no MX record for a do

Re: Strange Request

Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published > interface. (As others have already written, no /usr/lib/sendmail [or /usr/lib, for that matter] on Win2K or NT web servers.) > /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem > > is your friend (and remember to check $?)

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Robin Houston wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem > Use -oi as well. > You don't want "\n.\n" to terminate the message prematurely. Yes, indeed. Self-LART applied. MBM -- Matthew Byng-Maddick Home:

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:20:48PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for op

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > > > > I'v

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > /usr/lib/sendmail -t -oem Use -oi as well. You don't want "\n.\n" to terminate the message prematurely. .robin. -- "Sometimes I sit in front of my washing machine and contemplate the worthlessness of life. My washing m

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:20:48PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and > > > then just talk SMTP to them. S

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:19:46PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard module

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Michael Stevens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:47:48PM +, David Cantrell wrote: > > Write some stuff which will scan the local network for open relays and > > then just talk SMTP to them. Someone stupid enough to not be able to > > install modules is stupid enough to

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmai

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:09:42PM +, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really > > hits your cross-platform co

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Dave Cross wrote: > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really > hits your cross-platform compatibility. Why is this a problem? /usr/lib/sendmail is the published interf

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 03:00:41PM +, Dave Cross wrote: > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" rule, which is > that we'll have to send all mail by piping to sendmail. And that really > hits your cross-platform compatibility. Write some stuff which will scan the local

Re: Strange Request

Ok, this is obviously a good idea, some comment / ideas: 1) Create nms server (Not Matt Scripts). - setup mailing list(s). - I'm happy to host in a couple of weeks 2) Review and work out a 'core' module which can be part of the distrobution and impliment CGI.pm equiv stuff

Re: Strange Request

### warning - creature feep ### On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Aaron Trevena wrote: > > > > this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the > > collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond > > denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that > > just its core m

Re: Strange Request

* at 13/03 15:23 + Aaron Trevena said: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts > > > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt

Re: Strange Request

Dave Cross wrote: > I've just seen a downside to the "no non-standard modules" > rule, which is that we'll have to send all mail by piping > to sendmail. And that really hits your cross-platform > compatibility. Well, it depends on how much pain you want to inflict on yourself. socket and conne

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > * Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts > > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt > > Wright can achieve that and we're all much clever

Re: Strange Request

Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with > > machines/laptops, pair programming... > > > > have you ever tried herding cats? food and lots of stroking -- Dave Hodgkinso

Re: Strange Request

* Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with > machines/laptops, pair programming... > have you ever tried herding cats? -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Re: Strange Request

How about a hackfest one afternoon? A dozen people in a room with machines/laptops, pair programming... -- Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com Interim CTO, web server farms, tec

Re: Strange Request

From: "Dave Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > You need to define a standard and stick to it. I suggest we write to Perl > 5.004_04 as it was a) pretty stable and b) the first to include CGI.pm. > Agreed. I just installed one of his scripts on my laptop, Win98, Apache 1.3.9, ActiveState's Perl5.6. T

Re: Strange Request

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > At 13:50 13/03/2001, you wrote: > >Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most > > > the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies > > > who only all

Re: Strange Request

At 15:51 13/03/2001, you wrote: >* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts > > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt > > Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is,

RE: Strange Request

> do you exclude this script from the archive on the basis that it > uses TT? > > this question defines the archive of scripts a little. is the > collection of scripts specifically aimed at the lowest commond > denominator and tackling the MW problem directly, or is that > just its core mission,

Re: Strange Request

At 13:50 13/03/2001, you wrote: >Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most > > the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies > > who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and

Re: Strange Request

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > My opinion is that the only way this project could work is if the scripts > worked on _any_ web server on _any_ platform with _no_ extra modules. Matt > Wright can achieve that and we're all much cleverer than he is, so we > should be able to do it too.

Re: Strange Request

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd argue that you're _massively_ overestimating our audience there. Most > the Matt's users are people who have accounts with web hosting companies > who only allow FTP access. mod_perl usually _isn't_ installed and > installing CPAN modules is frowned

Re: Strange Request

At 14:33 13/03/2001, you wrote: >On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 02:34:50PM +, Dave Cross wrote: > > >I haven't looked at Matts scripts, but I get the feeling that they are > aimed > > >at beginners who have a fairly standard perl/apache installation[1]. I'm > > >sure your solution will be much bette

Re: Strange Request

At 15:10 13/03/2001, you wrote: >* Robert Shiels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 > > Subject: Re: Str

Re: Strange Request

At 13:05 13/03/2001, you wrote: >"Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 > &g

Re: Strange Request

At 14:02 13/03/2001, you wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 >Subject: Re: Strange Request > > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > &

Re: Strange Request

> and here we get back to the ROPE project as discussed before, where we > could do a standard distribution of Apache/Mod Perl/Perl/Perl modules, > with TT, XML::*, etc.,etc. already there Might not be a bad idea doing each of these in each of the technologies anyhow. It might prove a good way o

Re: Strange Request

* Robert Shiels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 > Subject: Re: Strange Request > > > > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Strange Request

"Robert Shiels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > - Original Message - > From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 > Subject: Re: Strange Request > > > > Dave Cross <

Re: Strange Request

- Original Message - From: "Dave Hodgkinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 13 March 2001 12:49 Subject: Re: Strange Request > Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get

Re: Strange Request

Dave Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think this is a good idea and would be happy to get involved. What I'd > like to see is a series of "drop in" replacements for Matt's scripts. There > are 15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to > rewrite them all? I've done his "ran

Re: Strange Request

> are 15 scripts on Matt's site. How long would it take us to > rewrite them all? A week, I would guess given the resource available. This would also make an interesting project for someone to try and coordinate this effort and arrange people into teams. Hmm, Design, Modularity, Specify inter

Re: Strange Request

> No, but it's run by Matt. That's a list of CGI scripts written by loads of > people - there are even some old embarrassments of mine in there :-/ You know we are all scrambling to find it now ;)

Re: Strange Request

> And if you're interested in Matt as a person (and who wouldn't be?) try: > > http://www.mattwright.com/msa.html "I always have lots of stuff in the works, but most of it only gets about halfway finished before I get bored and give up. That's the way I work. :) "

Re: Strange Request

At 12:03 13/03/2001, you wrote: >At 10:40 13/03/01, you wrote: >>I guess the problem is that you could create an archive of CGI programs >>written by the best Perl programmers in the world but people would _still_ >>find Matt's scripts first. > >is this Matt's script archive? > >http://www.cgi.res

Re: Strange Request

At 10:40 13/03/01, you wrote: >I guess the problem is that you could create an archive of CGI programs >written by the best Perl programmers in the world but people would _still_ >find Matt's scripts first. is this Matt's script archive? http://www.cgi.resourceindex.com/ That is what I found wh

Re: Strange Request

Jonathan Peterson wrote: > Maybe we need to sponsor Matt Wright? The inverse of the > Damian sponsorship, we would cover whatever revenue he gets > from his scripts in return for him shutting all the sites > down for a year, and redirecting everyone somewhere else. > What do you reckon? Sponsor M

RE: Strange Request

Title: RE: Strange Request > > > That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt. > >I thought Selena was female. Oh well. > Nope. He's a bloke called Eric. So's my dad - useful huh? Darren Clarke

RE: Strange Request

At 11:29 13/03/2001, you wrote: > > That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt. > >I thought Selena was female. Oh well. Nope. He's a bloke called Eric. -- SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Data Munging with Perl

RE: Strange Request

> That's Selena Sol. He's almost as bad as Matt. I thought Selena was female. Oh well.

Re: Strange Request

At 11:13 13/03/2001, you wrote: >At 10:58 13/03/2001 +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > >[snip] > > >>all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples. >>forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc. > >Isn't this what Extropia tried to do ? (www.extropia.com) > >Why did this not get

Re: Strange Request

At 10:58 13/03/2001 +, Greg McCarroll wrote: [snip] >all the good classic web problems, with simple ready to run examples. >forums, guestbooks, counters, voting, etc. Isn't this what Extropia tried to do ? (www.extropia.com) Why did this not get picked up, is it just to complicated ? Sim

Re: Strange Request

At 10:56 13/03/2001, you wrote: >On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with > > the problem at source - perl certification > > > > *duck* > > > > having said in another email how there were no resources to d

Re: Strange Request

* at 13/03 10:56 + Michael Stevens said: > On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:58:36AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > how to solve this, will there is an easy way that would deal with > > the problem at source - perl certification > > > > *duck* > > > > having said in another email how there were

Re: Strange Request

* at 13/03 10:43 - Jonathan Peterson said: > > > There's a marketing battle that needs to be fought first. We > > need, somehow, > > to ensure that newbie CGI programmers read criticisms of > > Matt's scripts > > _before_ they find Matt's Script Archive. And I don't know > > how you're going

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:08:52AM -, Miss Barbell wrote: > Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50 > cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by Matt Wright, with a > CD including many scripts from his site. What made even more amused was that >

Re: Strange Request

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > It's an important battle too, as each person that downloads an installs > Matt's scripts is one more person who will eventually decide that Perl is > too flakey and difficult to understand for serious use. > the effect is much worse than that, as ty

RE: Strange Request

> There's a marketing battle that needs to be fought first. We > need, somehow, > to ensure that newbie CGI programmers read criticisms of > Matt's scripts > _before_ they find Matt's Script Archive. And I don't know > how you're going > to undo five years of misinformation and achieve that. May

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:40:26AM +, Dave Cross wrote: > I guess the problem is that you could create an archive of CGI programs > written by the best Perl programmers in the world but people would _still_ > find Matt's scripts first. > There's a marketing battle that needs to be fought f

Re: Strange Request

At 10:20 13/03/2001, you wrote: >On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 10:15:29AM +, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > not read, bought! theres the big catch > > still we've done this argument several times and at the end of the day > > people want to be able to just grab a piece of ``perl cgi software'' > > and ru

Re: Strange Request

* Michael Stevens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > So what goes wrong every time someone else tries to setup an equivalent > archive of better code? I've seen it tried many times and it never works > out... > writing forums is just not that much fun? there are some good sources (Randal's WT,etc.)

Re: Strange Request

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:52:12AM +, Dave Cross wrote: > Just been wandering around the website and (as an owner of the book) was > able to access the 'private' areas. Well if you have a look at the vulnerabilitys database on securityfocus.com then you too can be an admin of the message bo

Re: Strange Request

* Dave Cross ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Good advert for the book - lucky you only get to see it once you've read > the book! not read, bought! theres the big catch still we've done this argument several times and at the end of the day people want to be able to just grab a piece of ``perl cg

Re: Strange Request

At 09:32 13/03/2001, you wrote: >At 09:27 13/03/01 +, you wrote: > >At 09:08 13/03/2001, you wrote: > >> > If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) > >> > >>Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50 > >>cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Bo

Re: Strange Request

At 09:27 13/03/01 +, you wrote: >At 09:08 13/03/2001, you wrote: >> > If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) >> >>Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50 >>cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by Matt Wright, with a >>CD incl

Re: Strange Request

At 09:08 13/03/2001, you wrote: > > If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) > >Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50 >cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by Matt Wright, with a >CD including many scripts from his site. What mad

Re: Strange Request

> If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) Walking round PC World yesterday (nice to look at things then buy them £50 cheaper online :) ) and spotted a Perl Book written by Matt Wright, with a CD including many scripts from his site. What made even more amused was that there was

Re: Strange Request

On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > well .. to be fair .. yes its appalling Perl but it works, and it IS the > > industry standard if only because there is nothing better freely > > available. > > Maybe I missed a meeting again, but doesn't the "industry" tend to > refuse the standardness of

Re: Strange Request

On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:28:42AM +, Robin Szemeti wrote: > On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: > > > http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: > > > > "For your convienience, we have a public CGI directory > > available to all our Unix hosting customers. included is

Re: Strange Request

On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, you wrote: > http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: > > "For your convienience, we have a public CGI directory > available to all our Unix hosting customers. included is > FormMail, the industry-standard form-to-email processor." >

Re: Strange Request

Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: > MBM (runs away very fast from ever having to touch a piece of > code by the now infamous Matt Wright ever again...) That reminds me of something I saw on the weekend: http://neptune.nildram.co.uk/users/cgi.php3 , last paragraph: "For your convienience, we

Re: Strange Request

On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Dean wrote: > code (Not Obfuscated contest level though :)) that i can use as > examples of bad coding style. > If all else fails I'll be raiding Matts script archive ;) This is probably your best bet :) MBM (runs away very fast from ever having to touch a piece of code