Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 11:26:28PM -0500, Mark Rogaski wrote: It's also sheer idiocy to pipe arbitrary code from an untrusted, unverified source directly to the shell. How is it less secure than downloading a tar file and typing ./configure? Admittedly you *could* check several meg of source for trojans, but I don't believe you *do*. Michael
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 10:42:34AM +, Steve Mynott wrote: "David H. Adler" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, you're much too kind. My redhat box is disintigrating before my very eyes. root partition filled up for no reason and, thus I looked at the partition table: / /boot /home With home being the largest. What *were* they thinking when they configured this? I don't think you can really blame the distribution (which allows you to partition the disk how you want) for someone partitioning the disk wrongly. Except that the box came to me like this. I intend to rectify this in a bit by scaping red hat off with a large trowel and installing something useful, but I'm still trying to figure out why *anyone* would partition it this way... :-/ dha -- David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ There are 6 billion people in the world, and only 30 billion of those are Canadians - Headline in the Toronto Globe and Mail
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yeah, I know, but then I compile plenty of stuff from scratch rather than rely on RPMs. The real reason I haven't switched is because it's really The drawback with 'make install' from source is that it doesn't write a database of files owned by that source package which is the great advantage of binary packages. So you can't use do 'make uninstall' to cleanly remove the program if you don't like or use it. This is basically what the *BSD ports system does. It should be possible to write some wrapper for GNU configure to add a 'make uninstall' to the Makefile. In the absence of this I usually type 'script' to log whats installed at the 'make install' stage.. *nasty* trying to switch from one distro to another without a) losing valuable config data and b) ending up with a ton of unused junk on the disk The way to handle UNIX configuration files is like software and use RCS. On every system you can then type one command 'locate ,v' to see all your local changes. You can then systematically port config changes to the new distribution. which is nigh-on impossible to tell apart from stuff that's in use. It's a one liner to display files that haven't been used in the last three months using 'find -atime'. Other advantage of binary package managers is you can then go ahead and delete large chunks of your OS that you never use and it should warn you if it breaks other stuff. -- 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: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 05:01:55AM +, Shevek wrote: I had always committed to the nature of Unix being that one does end up with a pile of stuff on disk which one doesn't use. for i in etc usr; do find /$i -mount -type f -atime +60 | perl -lne unlink; done :-) The point is that this doesn't matter. There are some downsides: if you have have old binaries that have slipped out of the upgrade/patch cycle you are looking at a potential security risk. I have thought in the past "1GB is *bound* to be a big enough /usr!" and when I hit 85% utilisation have to look at upgrading my disk, faffing with extra mounts or a suffering performance hit. Or clearing it all up. I bet you have libc5 and libc6 installed... # dpkg -l | grep libc[56] ii libc6 2.2-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone [snip other shit] # Paul
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 11:26:28PM -0500, Mark Rogaski wrote: An entity claiming to be David Cantrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: : : It's more than cute. It's *BRILLIANT*. The user doesn't even have to : know what computer they have. Whilst they only support a couple of : combinations of architecture and OS in that script, it would be pretty : damned trivial to have it support a few Linux distros, Solaris, *BSD : and MacOS X. : It's also sheer idiocy to pipe arbitrary code from an untrusted, unverified source directly to the shell. But it's so much fun! Well, on someone else's shift, anyway... :-) dave, just kidding, in case there was some question... -- David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ "You can't give a 4 to truth." - Saul Williams
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 02:53:57PM +, David Cantrell wrote: Surely, then, rpm should have the ability to install and fetch dependencies from the network automagically? Yes it should. It doesn't. Which is why Helix's installer is so much easier to use. start type="holy_war" Or, more sensibly, debian. apt-get install foo already knows how to fetch foo from the network and install, grabbing any required dependencies. I even hear you can use it with rpms these days. Michael
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 05:19:18PM -0600, Paul Makepeace wrote: It continues to amaze me that people still use Red Hat. It's just a pile of marketing driven crap. Debian is so far superior it hurts watching people struggle with RPMs. Yeah, I know, but then I compile plenty of stuff from scratch rather than rely on RPMs. The real reason I haven't switched is because it's really *nasty* trying to switch from one distro to another without a) losing valuable config data and b) ending up with a ton of unused junk on the disk which is nigh-on impossible to tell apart from stuff that's in use. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, David Cantrell wrote: rely on RPMs. The real reason I haven't switched is because it's really *nasty* trying to switch from one distro to another without a) losing valuable config data and b) ending up with a ton of unused junk on the disk which is nigh-on impossible to tell apart from stuff that's in use. I had always committed to the nature of Unix being that one does end up with a pile of stuff on disk which one doesn't use. The point is that this doesn't matter. Unless you're upgrading something every day or every week, the junk pile-up on a production server won't do much more than double or treble the hard disk usage of the OS, which will be small compared to the user data, and is still in a small order of magnitude. I bet you have libc5 and libc6 installed... It's still smaller than win2k... S. -- Shevek I am the Borg. sub AUTOLOAD { ($s=$AUTOLOAD)=~s/.*:://; eval qq{ *$AUTOLOAD=$s ?sub {$s*{$s-1}} :sub {1}; }; goto $AUTOLOAD; } print {'4'};
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
Following the interest in rope/pope, etc perhaps it would be an idea for some of the more perl / oss oriented companies in london (or wherever) to agree to take part in the project on a semi official basis - much of what the work that the london and UK companies do is replicated because of lack of comunications and worry over company secrets and competition. If a handful of london companies can put together a press release saying that they are supporting or backing the project with time, money, services in lieu, etc then it would be a publicity coup and get the ball rolling. A. -- A HREF = "http://termisoc.org/~betty" Betty @ termisoc.org /A "As a youngster Fred fought sea battles on the village pond using a complex system of signals he devised that was later adopted by the Royal Navy. " (this email has nothing to do with any organisation except me)
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
* Aaron Trevena ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Following the interest in rope/pope, etc perhaps it would be an idea for some of the more perl / oss oriented companies in london (or wherever) to agree to take part in the project on a semi official basis - much of what the work that the london and UK companies do is replicated because of lack of comunications and worry over company secrets and competition. If a handful of london companies can put together a press release saying that they are supporting or backing the project with time, money, services in lieu, etc then it would be a publicity coup and get the ball rolling. the first thing they could offer to do is to host the final rpms/tar.gz's what about the actual mechanics of putting rope together? i'm assuming we'd create a /usr/local/Rope, build the latest stable perl in there, then configure apache for mod_perl etc and install it under there as well, the the other modules. finally is it enough to simply tar.gz /usr/local/Rope and tag it with the architecture details we would probably need some final install program to be run, that would handle the local details of the system - such as what user to run apache as comments? suggestions? -- Greg McCarroll http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 02:16:15PM +, Andy Wardley wrote: Said I: In all fairness, I have to say that mailman is an *excellent* mailing list manager. Said David H. Adler: So why haven't you reimplemented it in perl? :) Are you sitting comfortably? :-) Because the tools aren't yet in place to allow me to do it within a truly flexible and generic application framework. [snip lengthy discussion of how to do this] Ah. I won't bother trying, then. :-) dha -- David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/ Also know as the first rule of finance: "Don't run out of money". - Tony Bowden
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 07:06:00PM +, Steve Mynott wrote: No you would want to build packages (.deb, .rpm and BSD and Solaris packages) of rope for a "binary" type install as well as supplying a "source" tar which works with make, make install. The installation method used by Helix is very nifty. lynx -source http://go-gnome.com/ | sh And that's it. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced
Re: Mailman in Perl (Re: the list is dead, long live the list)
On Fri, 12 Jan 2001, Paul Makepeace wrote: On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 08:28:25PM +, David Cantrell wrote: lynx -source http://go-gnome.com/ | sh that would rock. also what would be very valuable would be the ability to install from one config for a cluster or synchronise config changes (using a version control system of course). A. -- A HREF = "http://termisoc.org/~betty" Betty @ termisoc.org /A "As a youngster Fred fought sea battles on the village pond using a complex system of signals he devised that was later adopted by the Royal Navy. " (this email has nothing to do with any organisation except me)