From: owner-colug-digest@bopper.wcbe.org (colug-digest)
To: colug-digest@bopper.wcbe.org
Subject: colug-digest V2 #519
Reply-To:
Sender: owner-colug-digest@bopper.wcbe.org
Errors-To: owner-colug-digest@bopper.wcbe.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: colug@bopper.wcbe.org
colug-digest Thursday, November 4 1999 Volume 02 : Number 519
reply-to munging
Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
failed install RH6.0
Re: [COLUG] failed install RH6.0
Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 19:53:15 +0000
From: Curtis Smith <smith.3383@osu.edu>
Subject: reply-to munging
what does *this* mailing-list think of this:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
is it really such a big deal the author makes it out to be? the
reply-to field in colug mail is "munged".
just curious.........
curt
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 20:16:15 GMT
From: Pat Collins <collins.90@osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
>From what I read he made the mistake of sending out a private e-mail
to a whole list. So he makes and mistake and thus he has decided that
munging is bad and that nobody should do it. I say otherwise. Since
I don't use ELM I don't really have a group reply beyond the f'd up
replay to all. This makes the reply-to very useful on mailing lists,
I don't have to remove extra addresses (on this list) like I do for
some. Also, I usually try to re-read and double check what I've sent
because (1) sometimes what I write might not be what I really want to
say, (2) I don't want to mistakenly send out personal mail to a list
and (3) sometimes I just need to write a response even if I don't send
it.
Like now.....ooooops. :)
Pat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 11/4/99, 2:53:15 PM, Curtis Smith <smith.3383@osu.edu> wrote
regarding [COLUG] reply-to munging:
> what does *this* mailing-list think of this:
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> is it really such a big deal the author makes it out to be? the
> reply-to field in colug mail is "munged".
> just curious.........
> curt
> -
> COLUG mailing list tag line: =======================================
> Want to know more: http://static.colug.net/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:38:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Funk <rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
Pat Collins wrote:
>>From what I read he made the mistake of sending out a private e-mail
>to a whole list. So he makes and mistake and thus he has decided that
>munging is bad and that nobody should do it. I say otherwise.
I think it just depends on the group. On this list the biggest
problems come when someone sets their own Reply-To, and we end up with
two of them. Different software deals with this in different ways,
but very few reply only to the list in that case.
The fetchmail list doesn't munge, and it works except for one guy who
complains about getting duplicate mail. (And he won't listen to my
suggestions about dumping the duplicates with procmail/formail.)
In many cases it's more convenient to put the reply-to in, but what
should you do when people set their own reply-to? The author of that
essay has some valid points.
I run a non-technical mailing list with "munging" turned on. I made
that decision because these people are likely not to be familiar
enough with their software to know about "reply-to-all", and I'm not
familiar enough with their software to tell them about it. For the
most part people like it, but sometimes people do tend to send private
stuff to the list, then others ask if we can turn off the munging to
get rid of the misdirected private messages.
Basically it comes down to what you're used to -- if you're used to
hitting reply to send a private message, you don't like munging, and
if you're used to hitting reply for everything and don't care about
privacy, you like munging.
> Since
>I don't use ELM I don't really have a group reply beyond the f'd up
>replay to all.
Eh? Just about every mailer has some sort of group reply or reply to
all function. Pine can ask you when you reply whether to reply to all
recipients, and Eudora has Reply All right next to Reply. If your
mailer doesn't have it, it's broken. I've never used StarOffice for
mail, don't really want to let it mess with my mail, and don't have
any manuals for it handy, but I'd be surprised if there is no
reply-to-all function there somewhere.
- --
============= R o b F u n k =============|========> funk+@osu.edu <========
"A microscope locked in on one point | rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu
Never sees what kind of room that it's in"| rfunk@marvin.uts.ohio-state.edu
-- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind" |http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/~rfunk/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:41:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
- --- Pat Collins <collins.90@osu.edu> wrote:
> >From what I read he made the mistake of sending out a private e-mail
> to a whole list. So he makes and mistake and thus he has decided that
> munging is bad and that nobody should do it. I say otherwise. Since
> I don't use ELM I don't really have a group reply beyond the f'd up
> replay to all. This makes the reply-to very useful on mailing lists,
> I don't have to remove extra addresses (on this list) like I do for
> some. Also, I usually try to re-read and double check what I've sent
> because (1) sometimes what I write might not be what I really want to
> say, (2) I don't want to mistakenly send out personal mail to a list
> and (3) sometimes I just need to write a response even if I don't send
> it.
- -8<-
I agree with Pat. I have even munged my own reply to so that I don't get the
personal responses from the lists I'm on that don't munge the Reply-To. It's a
pain getting the same piece of mail twice.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:51:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Funk <rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] reply-to munging
Earnie Boyd wrote:
>I agree with Pat. I have even munged my own reply to so that I don't get the
>personal responses from the lists I'm on that don't munge the Reply-To.
And your reply-to is one of them that causes problems here. Mutt
takes the first reply-to it sees, which in this case would be your
invalid one. Bingo, nobody gets the message, and the sender gets a
bounce. Elm replies to all reply-to addresses, so a copy goes to the
list, and a copy gets bounced back to the sender. Your
address-munging technique is actually quite rude to those who would
reply.
> It's a
>pain getting the same piece of mail twice.
Just put four or five lines in a .procmailrc file.
# Get rid of duplicates
# (actually put them in dupes folder just in case)
# ListProcessor uses duplicate MessageIDs when sending meta-info, grrr....
# ... delete the ListProcessor line if you don't care about losing
# its status messages.
# (change "dupes" to /dev/null or {HOST} to actually drop the message
# instead of saving it off to a different folder.)
:0Whc: msgid.lock
| formail -D 65536 .mailcache
:0a:
* ! ^X-Listprocessor-
dupes
- --
============= R o b F u n k =============|========> funk+@osu.edu <========
"A microscope locked in on one point | rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu
Never sees what kind of room that it's in"| rfunk@marvin.uts.ohio-state.edu
-- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind" |http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/~rfunk/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:34:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Tom Hanlon <ab201@seorf.Ohiou.Edu>
Subject: failed install RH6.0
Installing Linux has gotten so easy that my troubleshooting skills have
atrophied. I hardly know where to start.
I did an ftp install of RH6.0 onto a PII machine with 1.2 gig hard drive.
Everything seemed to go fine. I made my boot disk. THen was faced with the
where to put lilo question. I tried the MBR and then I tried the boot
partition but I still get the same error.
Here is what happens
LILO runs up to the freeing unused kernel memory.
Then it hangs.. Given enough time it displays an error message.
- ----
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual
address 00000001
current->tss.cr3 = 0021800, %cr3=0021800
*pde = 00000000
Oops: 0
EIP: 0010:[<c010f584>]
EFLAGS: 00010202
eax: 00000000 ebx: c0002000 ecx: ffff0004 edx: 0000000b
esi: c800f988 edi: 40013a9c ebp: c0002000 esp: c0003f9c
ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
Process init (pid: 1 process nr: 1, stackpage=c0003000)
Stack: c0002000 (I am typing this by hand, I can give the the 24 8
character stack codes if they are needed)
Call Trace: [<c01096ad>] [<c01000023>]
Code: 8b 44 24 08 50 6a 01 52 e8 b3 fd ff ff 83 c4 0c c3 8d 76 00
exit_nmap: map count is -8
- -------
It is an ftp install over a windows network.
Are there BIOS settings that might be causing this.
Bad RAM?
TOm
--
Tom Hanlon ab201@seorf.ohiou.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:45:24 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Funk <rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] failed install RH6.0
Tom Hanlon wrote:
>Installing Linux has gotten so easy that my troubleshooting skills have
>atrophied. I hardly know where to start.
>
>I did an ftp install of RH6.0 onto a PII machine with 1.2 gig hard drive.
[...]
>LILO runs up to the freeing unused kernel memory.
>Then it hangs.. Given enough time it displays an error message.
>----
>Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual
>address 00000001
>current->tss.cr3 = 0021800, %cr3=0021800
>*pde = 00000000
>Oops: 0
An Oops indicates a kernel bug. RH6.0 uses a known-buggy version of
the kernel by default. Did you use the stock 6.0 disks, or the ones
from the updates? If it's not too much trouble, you might want to
start over, using the disks from
ftp://ftp.cis.ohio-state.edu/mirror/redhat-updates/6.0/images/i386/
(or maybe 6.1 since that's more current)
RH6.1 uses a fairly stable version of the kernel (2.2.12), so you
might want to go with that.
Another option would be to boot from a floppy and install the kernel
from the updates directory or *maybe* from 6.1.
- --
============= R o b F u n k =============|========> funk+@osu.edu <========
"A microscope locked in on one point | rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu
Never sees what kind of room that it's in"| rfunk@marvin.uts.ohio-state.edu
-- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind" |http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/~rfunk/
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:09:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Nielsen <colug@tcu-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
Thanks for the help and stuff!
I am looking at tex right now. I have been wanting to do it for a long
time, but I kept on getting delayed.
My biggest thing is creating pdf's, and it seems to be working rather
well.
I re-read Rick's article on tex. So it is
Tex to dvi to ps to pdf. It seems to work well, but xpdf isn't reading one
of my documents, while Acrobat and gv are. Weird.
I am going to test the tex2html stuff when I have all my examples done for
the tex to pdf stuff.
There was also a book I found on tex for web publishing, so I am going to
look into that book.
I think I am going to stick with tex for now, and perhaps use the sdf
format later. I think for ZING it is going to be a good idea to accept tex
or sdf. I was thinking of accepting rtf, but I have had problems
converting rtf to other formats in the past.
I was wondering if we should write everything for ZING in tex or sdf
first, before converting them to ps, pdf, or html.
By big thing is to be able to autoconvert data when people specify a file
type. If someone specifies a certain file and it is written in tex, we can
convert it to pdf, ps, dvi, or other formats on the fly and let the cgi
script handle
it so that we don't waste tons of diskspace. Then again, when you can buy
a 10 gig hard drive so cheap, who cares about space. Still, the cgi method
is "cool".
Tex is a pain to learn, so I think I might write a short article about how
to use Tex! Or, Rick and I should gather tex links not listed at tug.org.
There are probably some Linux journal or gazette articles on tex.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:24:36 -0500
From: mike mangino <mangino@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
try running pdflatex on the latex file you are using. That will do the conversion directly to pdf.
> I re-read Rick's article on tex. So it is
> Tex to dvi to ps to pdf. It seems to work well, but xpdf isn't reading one
> of my documents, while Acrobat and gv are. Weird.
>
>
> Mark
- --
Mike Mangino Consultant, Analysts International
mangino@cis.ohio-state.edu m.mangino@aicolumbus.com
Home: (614) 326-2278 Work: (614) 575 6337 ext. 314
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:28:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Rob Funk <rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: [COLUG] anybody have an opinion on sdf?
Mark Nielsen wrote:
>I re-read Rick's article on tex. So it is
>Tex to dvi to ps to pdf.
With pdfTeX (now included in teTeX) you can go directly from TeX to
PDF, bypassing dvi and postscript.
>There was also a book I found on tex for web publishing, so I am going to
>look into that book.
If it's "The LaTeX Web Companion", I bought it -- pretty interesting.
It has good info on XML too. One of the minor authors (Eitan Gurari)
is a CIS prof here at OSU; he's the one who taught me about parsers.
http://cseng.awl.com/bookdetail.qry?ISBN=0-201-43311-7&ptype=0
>By big thing is to be able to autoconvert data when people specify a file
>type. If someone specifies a certain file and it is written in tex, we can
>convert it to pdf, ps, dvi, or other formats on the fly and let the cgi
>script handle
>it so that we don't waste tons of diskspace. Then again, when you can buy
>a 10 gig hard drive so cheap, who cares about space. Still, the cgi method
>is "cool".
Good idea, but TeX isn't good for on-the-fly conversion. Too slow,
and it usually requires multiple passes.
>Tex is a pain to learn, so I think I might write a short article about how
>to use Tex! Or, Rick and I should gather tex links not listed at tug.org.
>There are probably some Linux journal or gazette articles on tex.
http://www.ams.org/tex/publications.html
I have links on my books page to good books on LaTeX.
http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/books.html#document-preparation
I haven't added the new "Web Companion" to it yet.
I wouldn't bother looking for Linux-specific TeX articles -- TeX is
one of the least Linux-specific pieces of software you'll run on
Linux, and it's been around a lot longer than Linux has.
- --
============= R o b F u n k =============|========> funk+@osu.edu <========
"A microscope locked in on one point | rfunk@wks.uts.ohio-state.edu
Never sees what kind of room that it's in"| rfunk@marvin.uts.ohio-state.edu
-- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind" |http://wks.uts.ohio-state.edu/~rfunk/
------------------------------
End of colug-digest V2 #519
***************************
COLUG-digest footer =================================================
Want to know more: http://static.colug.net/