December 2001 - Smartlist - lists.rwth-aachen.de

Archive egrep
by Alan Northam 19 Jul '18

19 Jul '18

The following is a sample of the results of a search that I receive by email. This there a way to hide the line number? ARCHIVE egrep august latest/* BEGIN---------------cut here------------------ latest/10:16:Monday, August 27, 2001 latest/11:16:Tuesday, August 21, 2001 latest/12:16:Wednesday, August 29, 2001 END-----------------cut here------------------ Thanks for your help! Alan,

2 1

modify the subscribe/unsubscribe-mail
by Martin M=?ISO-8859-1?B?/A==?=ller 19 Jul '18

19 Jul '18

hi! how can i modyfiy the text for the automatic subscribe/unsubscribe-mail? The possibilities of a *subscribe.txt*-file in my folder are not enough for me. I want suppress the information about the transmited data and translate the rest of the mail to german. TIA, martin -- "Who needs horror movies when we have Microsoft?" - Christine Comaford, PC Week

2 1

Archives?
by Mitchell Darer 19 Jul '18

19 Jul '18

Hello: Does SmartList have an archiving and (hopefully user friendly) search capability? [I'm not interested in the archives of this Disc List, but of the list I run for my 'users']. Thanks, Mitch Darer -- Mitchell Darer, WebMaster, mitch(a)focusing.org The Focusing Institute, 34 East Lane, Spring Valley, NY 10977 http://www.focusing.org (845) 362-5222 (phone/fax)

2 2

Re: does anyone find it ironic that smartlist mailing list is using Mailman?
by Charlie Summers 19 Jul '18

19 Jul '18

At 11:41 AM -0400 7/28/00, Werner Reisberger is rumored to have typed: > I never saw any > admin reply to the numerous complains about spam messages. Actually, that's not _strictly_ true, since I remember when Stephen was actually maintaining the list (and probably anally have archives of the list from that time somewhere on some floppy or MO cart from a long time ago and far far away). But you're right, it's been _years_ since he's been around. However, the list belongs to the maintainer (or at least the machine's admin), not the members. You'll get no argument from me that the list should be moved (I believe I said exactly that a couple of times), but to suggest the admins need to take a poll to ask what they may or may not do with the existing list is silly, to say the least. They are certainly able to move this list to mailman without the list subscriber's permission - indeed, they _have_ done so, which makes my point for me. Whether we should move this list to a SmartList server is a completely seperate issue...one which Philip should probably weigh in on, since he is now maintaining the procmail/SmartList source and as such the de facto head of our band of merry wanderers... Charlie

9 20

blocking a reply
by O'Rourke, Tom (CTR) 27 Jan '02

27 Jan '02

Greetings, Is it possible to block the reply of certain individuals from being distributed to a mailing list? Their accounts have been removed and it is only possible for certain people to post to the list. However, neither one of these options eliminates the possibility of these unwanted individuals from responding. Thanks in advance. Tom O'Rourke

5 6

AOL email troubles?
by CueMan 01 Jan '02

01 Jan '02

Hi, Anyone out there with AOL subscribers on your SmartList(s) not receiving all your deliveries or maybe not being able to post to your list from AOL? Thanks and happy holidays! --Paul T. --

6 8

Re: Replies bypassing "accept" file
by Tim Pierce 22 Dec '01

22 Dec '01

In article <v0313030db836032b2a4e(a)[192.168.123.10]>, Charlie Summers <charlie(a)lofcom.com> writes: > At 12:11 AM -0500 12/7/01, Remco Rijnders is rumored to have typed: > >> This is counter intuitive though. I know what it says and all that, >> but it easily leads you to assume that the "uncomment this line" part >> refers to the line just before it. > > It says pretty clearly to uncomment THIS line, not the line before it. C programs often use the same text, but it means exactly the opposite thing: /* HAVE_BLURFL: uncomment this line if your system has the blurfl() system call. */ /* #define HAVE_BLURFL */ The idiosyncratic syntax of procmail scripts makes the "uncomment this line" text more ambiguous than it might otherwise be. Sorry, Charlie. It sucks.

2 1

Sending message to non-subscribers
by Intrepid Video Info 22 Dec '01

22 Dec '01

Currently my lists forward emails to be from those not on the accept list. How can I have the list send them a message explaining how to subscribe. I DO NOT want to enable auto subscribe for various reasons. Thank you. Jeff mailto:Jeff@intrepid-video.com www.9-11-2001tragedy.com FAX 1-413-280-0677 Intrepid Video & Electronics Harrisburg, PA 17111 717-909-8844 www.intrepid-video.com www.tech-repair.net www.thetoolcaddy.com

8 8

Re: Fwd: Message status notification
by Miquel E. Cabañas 21 Dec '01

21 Dec '01

hi, On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:55:09 Irwin Lazar wrote: > Folks, I'm having trouble tracing down a problem subscriber and > I wanted to see if any list member could offer some tips. [...] > is there any way to trace this below message back to a specific > mailbox that can be removed? > if you have access to a linux/unix box you can try the program "vrfy" URL ftp://ftp.nikhef.nl/pub/network/vrfy.tar.Z URL http://www.nikhef.nl/user/e07 which will trace an e-mail address through mail servers, proxies and the like. It also allows for checking all e-mail addresses in a file (check its documentation). Nonetheless, note that broken servers could impede vrfy to complete its job. For instance, a suitable command line could be, $ vrfy -R -vvv -dHn someone(a)att.com rcpt 'someone(a)att.com' at 'kcmsi1.att.com' smtp phase connect connecting to kcmsi1.att.com (192.128.134.69) port 25 connected to kcmsi1.att.com smtp phase greeting wait <<< 220 kcmsi1.proxy.att.com ESMTP AT&T IPNS/MSI-3.0 ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:09:57 -0500 (EST) >>> EHLO sermn02.uab.es smtp phase EHLO wait <<< 250-kcmsi1.proxy.att.com Hello [158.109.8.53], pleased to meet you <<< 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES <<< 250-8BITMIME <<< 250-SIZE 500000000 <<< 250-ONEX <<< 250-XUSR <<< 250 HELP >>> VERB on smtp phase VERB wait <<< 502 5.7.0 Verbose unavailable >>> MAIL From:<> smtp phase MAIL wait <<< 250 2.1.0 <>... Sender ok >>> RCPT To:<someone(a)att.com> smtp phase RCPT wait <<< 250 2.1.5 <someone(a)att.com>... Recipient ok 2.1.5 <someone(a)att.com>... Recipient ok >>> RSET smtp phase RSET wait <<< 250 2.0.0 Reset state >>> QUIT smtp phase QUIT wait <<< 221 2.0.0 kcmsi1.proxy.att.com closing connection and a more verbose one would be `vrfy -R -vvv -dHn someone(a)att.com` which will interact will all possible mail exchangers. Miquel -- Miquel E Cabanas ------------------------------------------------------ SeRMN, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona (Miquel.Cabanas(a)uab.es) ------------------------------------------o-oo--ooo---ooo--oo-o--------

1 0

Fwd: Message status notification
by Irwin Lazar 21 Dec '01

21 Dec '01

Folks, I'm having trouble tracing down a problem subscriber and I wanted to see if any list member could offer some tips. For the last several months every message sent to my list has generated the below. I've e-mailed postmaster(a)att.com and have not received any response. Short of removing all 30-40 list members in the att.com domain, is there any way to trace this below message back to a specific mailbox that can be removed? Thanks in advance, Irwin ---------------------- >X-Persona: <mplsforum> >X-POP3-Rcpt: mplsrc12(a)mplsrc.com >Received: (from mplsrc12@localhost) > by host.secure4-hosting.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) id fBKJJLj27991 > for mplsrc12(a)mplsrc.com; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:19:21 -0500 >Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:19:21 -0500 >X-Authentication-Warning: host.secure4-hosting.net: mplsrc12 set sender to >mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com using -f >X-From_: Thu Dec 20 14:19:19 2001 >Received: from kcmso1.proxy.att.com (kcmso1.att.com [192.128.133.69]) > by host.secure4-hosting.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id > fBKJJJp27960 > for <mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:19:19 -0500 >Received: from attrh3i.attrh.att.com ([135.71.62.12]) > by kcmso1.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-3.0) with ESMTP id > fBKJJDn15282 > for <mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:19:13 > -0500 (EST) >Received: by attrh3i.attrh.att.com (5.5.029) id 3C069505004DF0E2 for >mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:44 -0500 >Message-Id: <200112201918.RBQ13665(a)attrh3i.attrh.att.com> >Old-Date: Thu, Dec 20 2001 14:18:39 EST >From: MAILER-DAEMON(a)attrh3i.attrh.att.com >To: mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com >Subject: Message status notification >X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored >X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem >X-Envelope-To: mpls-ops-request > >The mail routing agent encountered the following class of error: > >No entries found in directory for query > >----- Original Message Text Follows ----- > >Received: from wsscan.att.com (135.71.63.10) by attrh3i.attrh.att.com >(5.5.029) > id 3C069505004DF0C9; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:37 -0500 >Received: by wsscan.att.com; id OAA06742; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:55 -0500 >(EST) >Received: from almsi1.proxy.att.com(192.168.109.69) by >cyrus0.wsscan.att.com via csmap (V4.1) > id srcAAAisaOjn; Thu, 20 Dec 01 14:18:54 -0500 >Received: from host.secure4-hosting.net ([209.239.41.31]) > by almsi1.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSI-3.0) with ESMTP id > fBKJIwG10837; > Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:58 -0500 (EST) >Received: (from mplsrc12@localhost) > by host.secure4-hosting.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) id fBKJIva27924; > Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:57 -0500 >Resent-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 14:18:57 -0500 >X-Authentication-Warning: host.secure4-hosting.net: mplsrc12 set sender to >mpls-ops-request(a)mplsrc.com using -f

3 4