Re: CFT club
Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 09:32:18PM +, Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Are there many CFT people still out there? Care to be on a side list talking about - CVs, contracts, personal development, brainbench, pimps, worthwhile group projects and other cft related stuff? I'd be interested in that. But would all that stuff be really off-topic on this list? Do we need another list? Hmm...I'm looking at perhaps sharing stuff that you might not want in a public archive... -- Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: CFT club
From: Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 09:32:18PM +, Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Are there many CFT people still out there? Care to be on a side list talking about - CVs, contracts, personal development, brainbench, pimps, worthwhile group projects and other cft related stuff? I'd be interested in that. Me too. I've been off for 6 months now (4 of those were voluntary though, so it's really only 2 months of job searching). I hate this whole process, and am so annoyed doing it that I'm now applying for permanent jobs too. I do SAP technical work, not perl, so I guess it's of topic, but I think the problems I'm having are exactly the same - phantom jobs, agents who don't call back, plumetting rates... /Robert
Re: CFT club
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 08:51:52AM -, Robert Shiels wrote: From: Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 09:32:18PM +, Dave Hodgkinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Are there many CFT people still out there? Care to be on a side list talking about - CVs, contracts, personal development, brainbench, pimps, worthwhile group projects and other cft related stuff? I'd be up for that. I'd be interested in that. Me too. I've been off for 6 months now (4 of those were voluntary though, so it's really only 2 months of job searching). That's almost where I am (the last four weeks haven't been full of job searching due to various personal crap that always seems to happen but...). I finished a contract on October 31st. Still looking :( I hate this whole process, and am so annoyed doing it that I'm now applying for permanent jobs too. I do SAP technical work, not perl, so I guess it's of topic, but I think the problems I'm having are exactly the same - phantom jobs, agents who don't call back, plumetting rates... Well, I do perl and various other things like MS SQL (so sue me, I think it's the only truly good software product they make). I've had serious agent issues over the last 9 weeks of so. nic --
Re: PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction)
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:40:55AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 07:55:08AM +0100, Newton, Philip wrote: Which makes me think that if there isn't one standardised way, then PGP is unlikely to spread as quickly anyway. If people have to jump through hoops to sign messages/read signed messages/verify signatures, then a lot of people are going to be put off. RFC2015. Microsoft has chosen not to implement it. I despise Microsofts crappy mailer, unfortunately I am forced to use it in work. It doesn't do threading properly either. it's a steaming pile of shite. cheers Andrew
Re: CFT club
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 08:48:22AM +, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: Hmm...I'm looking at perhaps sharing stuff that you might not want in a public archive... We have had this discussion before. I can't find it in the archive with a quick look, but we have. Any mailing list is likely to get archived, even if the list administrator does not archive it, by a public list archiving robot (I can't remember the details and tech involved - someone else might be able to elaborate). So, if you don't want stuff archived publicly, don't use a mailing list. Some of these web archive robots ignore the noarchive header, apparently... -- Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction)
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 07:55:08AM +0100, Newton, Philip wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hooray! My setting addition to .muttrc worked! :) -- Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:38:03AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: You're either going to update the atime, or you have to update the ctime to reset the atime, or you have to read the raw disk somehow. Or use something other than mutt to tell you which mailboxes have new messages in them. xbuffy/gbuffy, if you're using an X desktop, for example. Roger -- He's an old-fashioned dishevelled cyborg with a secret. She's a tortured junkie nun with only herself to blame. They fight crime!
PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction)]
From: Newton, Philip [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction) From: Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction) From: Newton, Philip [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PGP signatures / list etiquette (was: Re: Newbie introduction ) Subject: Re: PGP signatures / list etiquette (was: Re: Newbie introduction ) From: Rob Partington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not enough data, but it seems that either a: someone added a space before the ')' and then some programs thought it was a good idea to fold the mail headers or b: when the subject got long enough some program thought it a good idea to fold the headers, and picked a point before the ')'. And once the fold was in, the subject has been getting progressively more mangled ever since. Nicholas Clark -- EMCFT http://www.ccl4.org/~nick/CV.html
Re: PGP signing (was Re: Newbie introduction)
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:18:43AM +, Andrew Wilson wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:40:55AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: RFC2015. Microsoft has chosen not to implement it. I despise Microsofts crappy mailer, unfortunately I am forced to use it in work. It doesn't do threading properly either. it's a steaming pile of shite. Thinking of all the crap Microsoft's mailer has brought to us (all those lovely bandwidth-friendly e-mail worms) I was wondering: If the first e-mail worms had cc'ed foo@microsoft.com on every message they'd sent. (where someone was something not easily filterable) would MS have paid a bit more attention to security earlier on? I fear this may be a very dangerous meme: A worm that also mounts a denial of service attack on a single third party. Nicholas Clark -- EMCFT http://www.ccl4.org/~nick/CV.html
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:51:44AM +, Roger Burton West said: Or use something other than mutt to tell you which mailboxes have new messages in them. xbuffy/gbuffy, if you're using an X desktop, for example. I'm, err, not. Unless I decide to run an X connection over ssh aswell. Which I don't want to. -- : it's pretty hard to look miserable when you're spinning on your head
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:51:44AM +, Roger Burton West wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:38:03AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: You're either going to update the atime, or you have to update the ctime to reset the atime, or you have to read the raw disk somehow. On a system where I am the only user I might be tempted to do this: mount -o noatime,remount /home rsync ... mount -o atime,remount /home
Re: CFT club
I've updated the DNS, and/or Cc: to speedbeaver.org.uk Sorry :(
Re: CFT club
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:42:39AM +, Natalie Ford wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 08:48:22AM +, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: Hmm...I'm looking at perhaps sharing stuff that you might not want in a public archive... We have had this discussion before. I can't find it in the archive with a quick look, but we have. Any mailing list is likely to get archived, even if the list administrator does not archive it, by a public list archiving robot Only if you allow the robot to subscribe. (I can't remember the details and tech involved - someone else might be able to elaborate). So, if you don't want stuff archived publicly, don't use a mailing list. Some of these web archive robots ignore the noarchive header, apparently... X-No-Archive is advisory only. There is no obligation on an archive to obey it. I certainly don't, and my mailiung list archives are on the web. I protect them with HTTP basic auth, but it would be foolish to assume that they will always be kept private. All it requires is for someone to break the authentication, or for me to accidentally break it, or for one of the people who have the password to share it, or someone to steal the disk it's on, or ... ANYTHING you say online is archived by someone somewhere. Assume that it will be repeated somewhere sometime. -- David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced
Re: Any news on the hotel front?
* Newton, Philip ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Anything new from CSM? I was half expecting them to contact us individually sometime during the last week to confirm the booking, but haven't heard anything since. there has been a response, i havent done anything about it as i was in NI for the weekend, back now and slowly catching up, bare with me -- Greg McCarroll http://217.34.97.146/~gem/
Re: CFT club
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:00:33PM +, David Cantrell wrote: ANYTHING you say online is archived by someone somewhere. Assume that it will be repeated somewhere sometime. Exactly. And thanks for clarifying the tech, dave! :) -- Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 11:29:25AM +, Simon Wistow wrote: Unless I decide to run an X connection over ssh aswell. Which I don't want to. You can run x over ssh? Kewl! How? -- Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CFT club
From: David Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ANYTHING you say online is archived by someone somewhere. Assume that it will be repeated somewhere sometime. Good advice that I've also been following for years. I'm even suspicious of private emails (though I think maybe you mean those too in your ANYTHING above), and especially of emails to company email addresses, which are possibly archived by the company, though this may even be illegal. /Robert
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Natalie Ford wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 11:29:25AM +, Simon Wistow wrote: Unless I decide to run an X connection over ssh aswell. Which I don't want to. You can run x over ssh? Kewl! How? Just make sure your ssh server and client both have it enabled (ForwardX11 yes and X11Forwarding yes) and then run programs as normal on the remote server. Then up they pop, encrypted in transit, on your local display. No need to set environment variables (or xhost allow, iirc) as ssh takes care of most of that stuff. the hatter
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 11:29:25AM +, Simon Wistow wrote:
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 10:51:44AM +, Roger Burton West said:
Or use something other than mutt to tell you which mailboxes have new
messages in them. xbuffy/gbuffy, if you're using an X desktop, for
example.
I'm, err, not.
Unless I decide to run an X connection over ssh aswell. Which I don't
want to.
So gut the X app and turn it into a console-based one. The trick for
identifying which messages are new won't be X-specific after all.
Alternatively I've found I like maildirs. They're a little more work,
but identifying new messages is just a case of
(ls Maildir/new ; ls Maildir/cur | grep -v ':2,[A-R]?*S[T-Z]?$' ) | wc -l
And identifying which folders have new stuff is just when
Maildir/{cur,new}/ was modified later than Maildir/
--
Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CFT club
Dave Hodgkinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.speedbeaver.com/mailman/listinfo/cft Ok, folks, try: http://www.speedbeaver.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cft And some of you signing up I _know_ don't have CFT so be prepared to be thrown off at some point... -- Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: CFT club
On 25 Feb 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote: Ok, folks, try: http://www.speedbeaver.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cft And some of you signing up I _know_ don't have CFT so be prepared to be thrown off at some point... Then surely they'll have the CFT available to sign up all over? :)
Re: rsync and mutt woes
the == the hatter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the Just make sure your ssh server and client both have it enabled the (ForwardX11 yes and X11Forwarding yes) and then run programs as normal the on the remote server. Then up they pop, encrypted in transit, on your the local display. And compressed, if you did ssh -z. Makes X on a dialup barely useable instead of completely unusable. the No need to set environment variables (or xhost allow, the iirc) as ssh takes care of most of that stuff. Yes. ssh rocks. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:30:38PM +, the hatter wrote: Just make sure your ssh server and client both have it enabled (ForwardX11 yes and X11Forwarding yes) and then run programs as normal on the remote server. Then up they pop, encrypted in transit, on your local display. No need to set environment variables (or xhost allow, iirc) as ssh takes care of most of that stuff. So, I need to be running X on my client end? I run ssh from windoze... -- Natalie Ford .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Natalie Ford wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 12:30:38PM +, the hatter wrote: Just make sure your ssh server and client both have it enabled (ForwardX11 yes and X11Forwarding yes) and then run programs as normal on the remote server. Then up they pop, encrypted in transit, on your local display. No need to set environment variables (or xhost allow, iirc) as ssh takes care of most of that stuff. So, I need to be running X on my client end? I run ssh from windoze... Um, yeah I think so. Ssh can get the bits across the wire in a safe way, but you need an application on either end that can interpret those bits in a useful way -- which means a local X server on the Windows box. Last time I checked, there weren't any good freeware ports of Win32/X, but maybe someone has managed to compile Xfree86 under Cygwin or something. Alternatively, you can run VNC on both ends, pipe *that* through SSH, and you end up not needing anything on the Windows side except for the VNC client software (and SSH I suppose, but that seems implicit here). I'm not sure how it compares performance wise to pure X -- worse, I'm guessing -- but it's super easy to set up and the main performance constraint seems to be plain old bandwidth, as opposed to whatever ram disc space you'd need to get X going reasonably well on top of Windows... -- Chris Devers Okay, Gene... so, -1 x -1 should equal what? A South American! [] no human can understand the Timecube and Gene responded without missing a beat Yeah. I'm not human.
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 17:05, Chris Devers wrote: On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Natalie Ford wrote: So, I need to be running X on my client end? I run ssh from windoze... Last time I checked, there weren't any good freeware ports of Win32/X, but maybe someone has managed to compile Xfree86 under Cygwin or something. Yep, Xfree86 does run under cygwin. Binaries are available. http://www.cygwin.com/xfree/ KDE runs pretty well too. Has anybody tried gnome? As for the performance issues Chris brings up, it depends on what you're doing. If you have a reasonably modern computer, you should be able to get it to run. Gimp over the network is pokey, but you would expect that. Xemacs is fine, and even web browsing is ok (I'd rather use galeon than IE, and my network is faster than my phone line, so it works ok.) -- mike '''Roger Waters had issues'. -- Robert Jones' -- Todd Larason' -- Barry Yarbrough
Re: Any news on the hotel front?
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 12:04:42 +, you (Greg McCarroll [EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: * Newton, Philip ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Anything new from CSM? I was half expecting them to contact us individually sometime during the last week to confirm the booking, but haven't heard anything since. there has been a response, i havent done anything about it as i was in NI for the weekend, back now and slowly catching up, bare with me I have also got a response on my request: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: YAPC 2002 - hotel reservation From: CSM [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 12:27:27 +0100 Dear Mr. Lindbach, Many thanks for your interest in the YAPC conference and for sending us your hotel reservation form. As the first requests for hotel reservations have reached us only a few days ago, we will start working on them next week. -- Regards/mvh Kåre Olai Lindbach I think it was Einstein who said: There is simple and fast solution for any problem. Unfortunately it is always wrong.
ssh (was Re: rsync and mutt woes)
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Natalie Ford wrote:
So, I need to be running X on my client end? I run ssh from windoze...
No you need to be running an XServer on your server end[1].
There are many X servers that work with Windows, and many ssh clients that
will do the forwarding to these clients. Most of these you need to pay
for. IIRC the latest (free as in beer) versions of putty[2] does X
forwarding, but you'll still need a seperate X Server running on
the windows box otherwise it won't have anything capible of drawing the
actual application ;-)
Personally on my Windows box I use cygwin[3] (free - beer and speech -
windows port of gnu stuff that has a nice installer) with a port of
gnu-ssh and XFree86[4]. It's not the most elegant solution, but it works
well enough for me for my occasional windows use and I don't have to pay
for anything. Most importantly, it's not rootless, meaning all your
Xserver windows run inside a big window.
Win-R
cmd
bash
startx
ssh 2shortplanks.com
xterm
[1] Oddness of X. The server is the computer with the monitor
attached to it. The programs you run on your Linux/FreeBSD/Computer are
the clients that need a server to display upon. It's the programs that
initilise the conversation because they want to display something.
[2] http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
[3] http://www.cygwin.com/
[4] http://cygwin.com/xfree/
--
s'' Mark Fowler London.pm Bath.pm
http://www.twoshortplanks.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t-Tputs(cl);for$w(split/ +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t-Tgoto(cm,$_,$y). $w;select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}
Re: rsync and mutt woes
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Chris Devers wrote:
but it's super easy to set up and the main performance constraint seems to
be plain old bandwidth, as opposed to whatever ram disc space you'd need
to get X going reasonably well on top of Windows...
The real killer is latency. I've had problems running X applications
between places with huge huge pipes that have a couple of slow hops
between them. If it takes 800ms for a packet to get there and back it's
really noticable.
Later.
Mark.
--
s'' Mark Fowler London.pm Bath.pm
http://www.twoshortplanks.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t-Tputs(cl);for$w(split/ +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t-Tgoto(cm,$_,$y). $w;select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}
