[12963] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 373 Volume: 9
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Wed Aug 4 20:17:25 1999
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 17:10:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Wed, 4 Aug 1999 Volume: 9 Number: 373
Today's topics:
smrsh and Perl Script: unknown mailer error 13 <bruce.w.mohler@cpmx.saic.com>
Re: towards uploading binary files... (Abigail)
Unexplainable Problem nkaiser@my-deja.com
Re: Unexplainable Problem <mattk@cybersurf.net>
Re: Unexplainable Problem <laurens@bsquare.com>
Re: Wanted: Perl Script to parse email headers and body (Mike Bristow)
where in the %^#%$ is Adam Margulies candace_cardinal@my-deja.com
Re: Why is it.... (Bob Trieger)
Re: Why is it.... (Abigail)
Re: Why is it.... (Larry Rosler)
Re: Why is it.... (Abigail)
Re: Why is it.... (Ben Coleman)
Re: Why is it.... <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Re: Why is it.... <sariq@texas.net>
Re: Why is it.... (Larry Rosler)
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 1 Jul 99) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 15:03:42 -0700
From: Bruce Mohler <bruce.w.mohler@cpmx.saic.com>
Subject: smrsh and Perl Script: unknown mailer error 13
Message-Id: <37A8B8BE.7FB66B5@cpmx.saic.com>
Greetings!
I'm running Red Hat Linux 6.0 which seems to be running sendmail
v8.9.3 which was built with support for smrsh.
I need to have an account receive e-mail and pipe it to a Perl
script for processing. This worked fine on a RH Linux 5.1
system which was not configured for smrsh.
The .forward file in the account's home directory looks like this:
|/home/xyz/incoming.pl
The permissions on the .forward file are 0600.
The script resides in the home directory of account "xyz" with
permissions 0755.
The smrsh binary directory is /etc/smrsh and there is a symbolic
from the /etc/smrsh directory to the Perl script in the account's
home directory.
ln -s /home/xyz/incoming.pl /etc/smrsh/incoming.pl
Each time that I send e-mail to the "xyz" account on the system,
the maillog reports "unknown mailer error 13".
I did restart sendmail after creating the link in /etc/smrsh.
I checked the Costales/Allman sendmail book 2nd ed., but the one
reference in the index (p. 502) was not terribly enlightening.
The majordomo FAQ suggested looking at errno.h to find out what
the significance of "13" is and I finally found the <asm/errno.h>
which says that it's EACCES "Permission denied".
Any suggestions? I'm at a loss. I must be doing something stupid.
I'd like to find out what it is so that I can stop it and move
onto the next one...
Bruce
--
Bruce W. Mohler 858-826-2675 (voice)
SAIC/ITS/Server Support 858-826-7806 (fax)
Sr UNIX system administrator 888-781-5697 (pager)
mailto:bruce.w.mohler@saic.com
Of course my password is the same as my pet's name.
My dog's name is pit5%dept, but I change it every 90 days.
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1999 17:44:42 -0500
From: abigail@delanet.com (Abigail)
Subject: Re: towards uploading binary files...
Message-Id: <slrn7qhghl.tec.abigail@alexandra.delanet.com>
irf@netexecutive.com (irf@netexecutive.com) wrote on MMCLXIV September
MCMXCIII in <URL:news:7oa4hj$sln$1@nnrp1.deja.com>:
$$
$$ >> hi i am relatively new to perl & :
$$ >You are new to colons?
$$ read it like someone cool be sayin it (urrk)
$$
$$ %% read(STDIN, $buffer, $ENV{'CONTENT_LENGTH'});
$$ %% $dat=$buffer;
$$
$$ >THAT IS WRONG!
$$
$$ eh? no it's not. i'm using it now, and thanks to a nudge from sexy larry
$$ (what a great pic on your homepage, man) :) it works. it's better to
$$ check bytes,and this whole thing is probably ultra-insecure, but it
$$ isn't WRONG.
If it isn't wrong, then why is it better to check bytes? If it isn't wrong,
you will always read $ENV {CONTENT_LENGTH} of bytes, and you don't have to
check for bytes. But, if read isn't garanteeing that $ENV {CONTENT_LENGTH}
bytes will be read, you have to check bytes, and not doing so is wrong.
Now, my copy of the manual says about read:
=item read FILEHANDLE,SCALAR,LENGTH,OFFSET
=item read FILEHANDLE,SCALAR,LENGTH
Attempts to read LENGTH bytes of data into variable SCALAR from the
specified FILEHANDLE. Returns the number of bytes actually read,
C<0> at end of file, or undef if there was an error.
It isn't saying that LENGTH bytes will be read; it's only *trying* to
read that much. So you must check for bytes read.
Abigail
--
perl -MNet::Dict -we '(Net::Dict -> new (server => "dict.org")
-> define ("foldoc", "perl")) [0] -> print'
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 22:59:38 GMT
From: nkaiser@my-deja.com
Subject: Unexplainable Problem
Message-Id: <7oagkj$5uv$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
I have a really weird situation:
I have a CGI which sends an email with sendmail in the middle of the
script. It is a routine I've used a million times, but it just won't
work for some reason.
I've narrowed it down to where the program dies:
open (MAIL,"|/usr/sbin/sendmail -t");
print MAIL "To: me\@addr.com\n";
print MAIL "From: me\@addr.com\n";
print MAIL "Reply-to: me\@addr.com\n";
print MAIL "Subject: Work!!!!\n\n";
print MAIL "<EOM>\n";
print "DEBUG!!";
close MAIL;
print "NEVER MAKES IT HERE";
Something happens when I issue the close MAIL. The script just dies. I
don't have any hanging filehandles called "MAIL" either.
If I copy this snippet out of the large script,it runs fine.
I've tried buffers flushed and unflushed, no luck.
At one time, I did a :
close MAIL || print "$!" and it said "Bad File Descriptor"
Can anyone shed some light??
Thanks much.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 17:15:43 -0700
From: Matt Kennedy <mattk@cybersurf.net>
Subject: Re: Unexplainable Problem
Message-Id: <37A8D7AF.165A1E23@cybersurf.net>
Always check the open statement...
#
open ... or die("Can't open sendmail");
#
Matt
nkaiser@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> I have a really weird situation:
>
> I have a CGI which sends an email with sendmail in the middle of the
> script. It is a routine I've used a million times, but it just won't
> work for some reason.
>
> I've narrowed it down to where the program dies:
>
> open (MAIL,"|/usr/sbin/sendmail -t");
> print MAIL "To: me\@addr.com\n";
> print MAIL "From: me\@addr.com\n";
> print MAIL "Reply-to: me\@addr.com\n";
> print MAIL "Subject: Work!!!!\n\n";
> print MAIL "<EOM>\n";
> print "DEBUG!!";
> close MAIL;
> print "NEVER MAKES IT HERE";
>
> Something happens when I issue the close MAIL. The script just dies. I
> don't have any hanging filehandles called "MAIL" either.
>
> If I copy this snippet out of the large script,it runs fine.
>
> I've tried buffers flushed and unflushed, no luck.
>
> At one time, I did a :
>
> close MAIL || print "$!" and it said "Bad File Descriptor"
>
> Can anyone shed some light??
>
> Thanks much.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 16:36:17 -0700
From: "Lauren Smith" <laurens@bsquare.com>
Subject: Re: Unexplainable Problem
Message-Id: <7oaipk$ca$1@brokaw.wa.com>
nkaiser@my-deja.com wrote in message <7oagkj$5uv$1@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>open (MAIL,"|/usr/sbin/sendmail -t");
Try checking for success here:
open (MAIL,"|/usr/sbin/sendmail -t") or die "sendmail: $!";
>print MAIL "To: me\@addr.com\n";
>print MAIL "From: me\@addr.com\n";
>print MAIL "Reply-to: me\@addr.com\n";
>print MAIL "Subject: Work!!!!\n\n";
>print MAIL "<EOM>\n";
Does the program do any of those?
>print "DEBUG!!";
Can you see this?
>close MAIL;
Are you absolutely sure that MAIL is an open filehandle before you try to
close it?
>print "NEVER MAKES IT HERE";
If you can see "DEBUG!!", but not this, something is awry. OTOH, if you
can't see either one, maybe you've rerouted your STDOUT to somewhere else?
>If I copy this snippet out of the large script,it runs fine.
The program has a bug somewhere other than these lines, then, it seems.
>At one time, I did a :
>
>close MAIL || print "$!" and it said "Bad File Descriptor"
Check the open()ing of the filehandle.
Lauren
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 22:13:52 GMT
From: mike@fat.dotat.at (Mike Bristow)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Perl Script to parse email headers and body
Message-Id: <slrn7qhep0.e9d.mike@lindt.fat.dotat.at>
On Wed, 04 Aug 1999 21:07:50 GMT, Andrew Hearn <a_s_hearn@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I am looking foer a per script that will take an email as STDIN and then
>parse it so that the header information is stored in name/value pairs
>and the body is put into a string or something.
>
>I have seen what Majordomo uses, but this only strips the Header
>information.
>
>Thank you very much.
You probably want to use the modules that do this kind of thing
for you; look at Mail::Internet. (http://www.cpan.org is a
reference you should look at; also perldoc CPAN for an easy way
to install modules)
Also, what you ask for is probably not what you really wany -
mail messages can have many headers with the same `tag'. Here's
an example:
Received: from a.example.org ([xxx.xxx.247.40])
by lindt.fat.dotat.at with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #1)
id 11BiRG-0003RC-00
for mike@fat.dotat.at; Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:33:22 +0100
Received: from hawking ([xxx.xxx.153.67])
by a.example.org (1.0.1)
with SMTP id SAA26735; Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:18:28 +0100 (BST)
What do you put in $headers{Received}?
The value of the first received header? The value of the second?
A referernce to an array containing them both (and any more that pop
along)?
--
Mike Bristow, Geek-At-Large. GK/RT0038
one tequila - two tequila - three tequila - FLOOR !!!
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 23:09:57 GMT
From: candace_cardinal@my-deja.com
Subject: where in the %^#%$ is Adam Margulies
Message-Id: <7oah7s$6br$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Adam Margulies was teaching a UCBX Perl class in
SF that ended last week, and he seems to has
vanished completely, not answering email, phone
calls, leaving all of us in the lurch with regards
to the final, when the class will be over, etc.
What happened Adam, was it really that bad? Why
are we all talking to the hand?....If anyone knows
what/why happened to Adam, please let me and/or UC
Berkeley extension know, so maybe I can get my
$375.00 back.......
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 22:26:13 GMT
From: sowmaster@juicepigs.com (Bob Trieger)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <7oadmj$3df$1@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
jcasey@workingventures.ca (John Casey) wrote:
>I have heard that jerking off multiple times a day increases your
>capacity for learning Perl and makes you a boastful ass hole. Yup,
>thats got to be it.
Nope, that is an old-wives tale. I've been hacking at Perl for 5+ years
and I am still learning. And, I'm not boastful.
Why do I get the feeling that you had to ask an alt.sex newsgroup how
to jerk off before you did it?
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1999 18:04:33 -0500
From: abigail@delanet.com (Abigail)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <slrn7qhhmq.tec.abigail@alexandra.delanet.com>
David Cassell (cassell@mail.cor.epa.gov) wrote on MMCLXIV September
MCMXCIII in <URL:news:37A88A10.A96611AC@mail.cor.epa.gov>:
()
() BTW, why is it acceptable to tell people that they have no
() athletic ability, no musical ability, etc., but you
() are a creep if you try to tell someone they have no gift
() for programming?
I don't believe in this crap. Programming isn't some gift or art.
Programming is something you can learn. Just like car mechanics.
Or surgery. Or glass blowing. Or shoe repair.
Some people are better learners than others. Some people aren't interested
to learn programming, or how to repair shoes. Some jobs require more
learning than others. But there's no such thing as a born programmer.
Abigail
--
package Just_another_Perl_Hacker; sub print {($_=$_[0])=~ s/_/ /g;
print } sub __PACKAGE__ { &
print ( __PACKAGE__)} &
__PACKAGE__
( )
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:46:21 -0700
From: lr@hpl.hp.com (Larry Rosler)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <MPG.12126299caffdc65989dd0@nntp.hpl.hp.com>
In article <7oade6$paf$1@info2.uah.edu> on 4 Aug 1999 22:04:54 GMT, Greg
Bacon <gbacon@itsc.uah.edu> says...
> In article <MPG.12124d18f41205dd989dc7@nntp.hpl.hp.com>,
> lr@hpl.hp.com (Larry Rosler) writes:
> : For generations, IBM used the Mongol Horde approach to programming --
> : put low-paid programmers in a big room and have them implement specs
> : written by gurus. IBM made tons of money, no matter what we may think
> : about the quality of the products.
>
> What's your point? Are you claiming that programmers who earn low
> salaries are necessarily bad programmers?
Not 'necessarily bad programmers' -- but probably minimally qualified.
Otherwise they would have been able to get higher-paid positions, as I
did in a research laboratory.
> : And now Micro$oft has done the same.
>
> False. The RFCs (arguably written by gurus) are available, but
> Microsoft just ignores them. They implement software that loosely
> resembles but doesn't adhere to those standards. Don't believe for
> a second that it isn't intentional.
I am talking about quality of implementation, not adherence to
standards. Would you buy an automobile that had to be towed to the side
of the highway and rebooted maybe once a day? But lots of people have
bought Windows 95, and tolerate it. "Don't believe for a second that it
isn't intentional." because it's faster for M$ to produce the crap and
cheaper for them to support the crap than for them to do it right, with
better-qualified (hence higher-paid) programmers.
> : Your analogy to medical care is somewhat bogus.
>
> That's why they call it reductio ad absurdum.
Proper 'reductio ad absurdum' arguments are not bogus. They are proofs
-- provably correct. Your arguments are analogies, not proofs.
> : Though even there, many HMOs employ journeymen physicians, and those
> : patients who don't have the freedom to choose their physicians are
> : stuck with them. And maybe newsgroup support and modern tools would
> : help them also.
>
> Would you go to a doctor who was a recent graduate of the "Get Your
> MD in 21 Days" program? Would you go to him even if he had great
> tools and access to Usenet?
>
> Would you want your children in a classroom with a teacher who was a
> recent graduate of the "Get Your Teaching Certificate in 21 Days"
> program? Even if he had great books and access to Usenet?
>
> Would you take your car to a someone who was a recent graduate of
> the "Learn to Fix Cars in 21 Days" program? Even if he had great
> tools and access to Usenet?
<Repetitive blather not snipped, so we can savor the inanity yet again.>
> One doesn't develop the knowledge and experience to render professional
> services overnight. To qualify as anything more than a hobbyist, one
> needs talent and other natural gifts.
You are blind to my point that there are THREE categories. What we
should be worried about is the ever-increasing number of 'programmers'
in the lowest -- "programming thrust upon 'em" -- category. If the only
useful category of programmers were the highest -- "born to program" --
there would be no profession, because there aren't enough of *them* to
do all that has to be done.
I am focusing on the middle -- "achieve programming" -- category, who
need all the help that *we* in the same category can give them, for
example in this newsgroup. That's why I spend so much time here
answering reasonable questions from intermediate (or intelligent novice)
programmers. And when my answers are improved on, I learn also.
--
(Just Another Larry) Rosler
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Larry_Rosler/
lr@hpl.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1999 18:07:07 -0500
From: abigail@delanet.com (Abigail)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <slrn7qhhrn.tec.abigail@alexandra.delanet.com>
feinster@my-deja.com (feinster@my-deja.com) wrote on MMCLXIV September
MCMXCIII in <URL:news:7oa4jh$sm7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>:
[]
[] gee... it just maybe _possibly_ might be easier to ASK a question in a
[] newsgroup rather than spend hours searching through the docs... ya'
[] think?
It's also easier to shit in the corner of a room than to find the bathroom.
Does that mean it's a good idea?
Abigail
--
perl -wleprint -eqq-@{[ -eqw\\- -eJust -eanother -ePerl -eHacker -e\\-]}-
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 23:26:24 GMT
From: tnguru@termnetinc.com (Ben Coleman)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <37a8c920.95106756@news.mindspring.com>
On Wed, 04 Aug 1999 19:34:10 GMT, feinster@my-deja.com wrote:
>gee... it just maybe _possibly_ might be easier to ASK a question in a
>newsgroup rather than spend hours searching through the docs... ya'
>think?
To the short-sighted, it will seem that way. In the long run, taking the
time to develop the skills(and figure out the tools) necessary to quickly
find your answer from the provided documentation will pay off.
Ben
--
Ben Coleman
Senior Systems Analyst
TermNet Merchant Services, Inc.
Atlanta, GA
------------------------------
Date: 4 Aug 1999 17:38:41 -0700
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@mox.perl.com>
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <37a8cf01@cs.colorado.edu>
[courtesy cc of this posting mailed to cited author]
In comp.lang.perl.misc,
abigail@delanet.com writes:
:I don't believe in this crap. Programming isn't some gift or art.
:Programming is something you can learn. Just like car mechanics.
:Or surgery. Or glass blowing. Or shoe repair.
Really? You don't believe that some people have a knack for math and
that other don't? Do you believe that someone who doesn't have a logical
mind can be taught to have one? Do you believe that someone who doesn't
have intuitive leaps of insight can be taught to have them? How do you
do that? Where is creativity? How do you teach it? How do you learn it?
Do you feel that the people who just don't "get" programming are all lazy?
--tom
--
I won't mention any names, because I don't want to get sun4's into
trouble... :-) --Larry Wall in <11333@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 1999 18:32:25 -0500
From: Tom Briles <sariq@texas.net>
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <37A8CD89.977F6F72@texas.net>
Abigail wrote:
>
> David Cassell (cassell@mail.cor.epa.gov) wrote on MMCLXIV September
> MCMXCIII in <URL:news:37A88A10.A96611AC@mail.cor.epa.gov>:
> ()
> () BTW, why is it acceptable to tell people that they have no
> () athletic ability, no musical ability, etc., but you
> () are a creep if you try to tell someone they have no gift
> () for programming?
>
> I don't believe in this crap. Programming isn't some gift or art.
Weren't you espousing Knuth's _The Art of Computer Programming_ just a
day or two ago?
> Programming is something you can learn. Just like car mechanics.
> Or surgery. Or glass blowing. Or shoe repair.
I can also learn how to play basketball, but that doesn't mean I'll be a
Michael Jordan - no matter how much I practice.
>But there's no such thing as a born programmer.
I'd agree that people who become great programmers generally aren't
*just* great programmers. They often have an aptitude for other related
activities. But I don't think that someone born without the aptitude
will ever be a *great* programmer.
- Tom
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 16:39:11 -0700
From: lr@hpl.hp.com (Larry Rosler)
Subject: Re: Why is it....
Message-Id: <MPG.12126ef6d8fe9777989dd2@nntp.hpl.hp.com>
In article <slrn7qhhmq.tec.abigail@alexandra.delanet.com> on 4 Aug 1999
18:04:33 -0500, Abigail <abigail@delanet.com> says...
> David Cassell (cassell@mail.cor.epa.gov) wrote on MMCLXIV September
> MCMXCIII in <URL:news:37A88A10.A96611AC@mail.cor.epa.gov>:
> ()
> () BTW, why is it acceptable to tell people that they have no
> () athletic ability, no musical ability, etc., but you
> () are a creep if you try to tell someone they have no gift
> () for programming?
>
> I don't believe in this crap. Programming isn't some gift or art.
> Programming is something you can learn. Just like car mechanics.
> Or surgery. Or glass blowing. Or shoe repair.
>
> Some people are better learners than others. Some people aren't interested
> to learn programming, or how to repair shoes. Some jobs require more
> learning than others. But there's no such thing as a born programmer.
Nicht wahr, Herr Mozart?
As I am hashing out with Greg Bacon in another branch of this thread, I
think there is a trichotomy, where the people you are talking about --
most of us -- are in the middle category. The people in the other two
categories either can't learn programming, or have grokked it without
needing formal education.
--
(Just Another Larry) Rosler
Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Larry_Rosler/
lr@hpl.hp.com
------------------------------
Date: 1 Jul 99 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 1 Jul 99)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
the single line:
subscribe perl-users
or:
unsubscribe perl-users
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.misc (and this Digest), send your
article to perl-users@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
The Meta-FAQ, an article containing information about the FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users meta-faq". The real FAQ, as it
appeared last in the newsgroup, can be retrieved with the request "send
perl-users FAQ". Due to their sizes, neither the Meta-FAQ nor the FAQ
are included in the digest.
The "mini-FAQ", which is an updated version of the Meta-FAQ, is
available by requesting "send perl-users mini-faq". It appears twice
weekly in the group, but is not distributed in the digest.
For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V9 Issue 373
*************************************
