[15994] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 3406 Volume: 9
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sun Jun 18 00:05:41 2000
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:05:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Message-Id: <961301109-v9-i3406@ruby.oce.orst.edu>
Content-Type: text
Perl-Users Digest Sat, 17 Jun 2000 Volume: 9 Number: 3406
Today's topics:
Re: Auto Gallery Maker <snowhare@long-lake.nihongo.org>
Checking for open socket before writing to it? <vadlapat@ecst.csuchico.edu>
Re: Checking for open socket before writing to it? <sweeheng@usa.net>
Re: Content type !! <r.meEEEtcalfNOSPAM@exXXX.acCCC.ukKKK>
Converting Char to Hex .. <oke@oke.oke>
Re: Converting Char to Hex .. <tina@streetmail.com>
Re: Converting Char to Hex .. <bwalton@rochester.rr.com>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... (John Stanley)
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <godzilla@stomp.stomp.tokyo>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... (brian d foy)
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... (Abigail)
Re: Crazy enough that it might just work... (brian d foy)
Current time minus file's datestamp time <president@webticker.com>
Re: Current time minus file's datestamp time <rootbeer@redcat.com>
Re: Current time minus file's datestamp time <bwalton@rochester.rr.com>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 16 Sep 99) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:34:20 GMT
From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@long-lake.nihongo.org>
Subject: Re: Auto Gallery Maker
Message-Id: <M1T25.7$4z6.12785@news.pacbell.net>
Amber <amber@babesonthebeach.com> wrote:
: I am looking for a free, and I stress free perl script that will randomly
: create a thumbnail gallery from a directory of images. Each thumbnail Must
: link to it's full size image. I have found one script ($300.00) but I'm not
: in the position to be able to pay for such a program. If anyone can help,
: please email me. I'm willing to add links from ALL my pages to anyone that
: can help.
I have a script for doing close to what you want at
http://www.nihongo.org/snowhare/utilities/htmlthumbnail/
It is basically a wrapper around the NetPBM utilities configured
to generate nice thumbs with a ton of options.
--
Benjamin Franz
"Magic is real, unless declared integer."
-- Wiz Zumwalt
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:38:35 -0700
From: Ramesh Vadlapatla <vadlapat@ecst.csuchico.edu>
Subject: Checking for open socket before writing to it?
Message-Id: <Pine.GHP.4.05.10006171934580.28991-100000@cancer.ecst.csuchico.edu>
Hello!
I am using this command to connect to a server:
$socket1=IO::Socket::INET->new(PeerAddr=>"$hostname:$new_port",Proto=>"tcp");
The server occasionaly shuts down, thereby closing the socket and my print
command:
$socket1->print($message);
fails and I get a Broken Pipe message and the script just exits.
How do I make sure that the server socket is open before I write to it?
Thanks for your help,
Ramesh
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 11:25:09 +0800
From: "Swee Heng" <sweeheng@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Checking for open socket before writing to it?
Message-Id: <8ihf3c$9r8$1@clematis.singnet.com.sg>
> Hello!
>
> I am using this command to connect to a server:
> $socket1=IO::Socket::INET->new
> (PeerAddr=>"$hostname:$new_port",Proto=>"tcp");
>
> ...
>
> How do I make sure that the server socket is open before I write to
> it?
IO::Socket::INET is a subclass if IO::Handle. There is an opened() method
under IO::Handle. So maybe you can try
$socket1->print($message) if $socket1->opened;
Hope that helps.
Swee Heng
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 01:27:38 +0100
From: "Robert Metcalf" <r.meEEEtcalfNOSPAM@exXXX.acCCC.ukKKK>
Subject: Re: Content type !!
Message-Id: <8ih4tm$d1tf$1@athena.ex.ac.uk>
> > code:-
> > ------
> > print "Content-type: text/html\n\n";
> > print "Hello World\n";
>
This is what I get when I try to run a script without having permision to
run scripts in that dir from the server
--
----------------------------------------------------------
REMOVE all capital letters to email me
FYI: If the subject of the message is:
Newbie Question
Please help me
or anything else not conatining the topic of the message, I tend to skip the
post.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:32:24 GMT
From: "Gmo" <oke@oke.oke>
Subject: Converting Char to Hex ..
Message-Id: <Y%S25.47147$xe3.330921@nlnews00.chello.com>
I cant find anything on convering a char to a hexidecimal value in one
function .. i wanted to use it in a regular expression .. basically i wanna
do and inverted version of the well known:
$value =~ s/%([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])/pack("C", hex($1))/eg;
i just cant seem to figure it out .. can someone help me??? ..
and does anyone know where i can go for questions about sql?
thanks anyway ..
Vincent ..
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jun 2000 23:00:32 GMT
From: Tina Mueller <tina@streetmail.com>
Subject: Re: Converting Char to Hex ..
Message-Id: <8igvug$4rvsv$3@fu-berlin.de>
hi,
Gmo <oke@oke.oke> wrote:
> I cant find anything on convering a char to a hexidecimal value in one
> function .. i wanted to use it in a regular expression .. basically i wanna
> do and inverted version of the well known:
> $value =~ s/%([a-fA-F0-9][a-fA-F0-9])/pack("C", hex($1))/eg;
> i just cant seem to figure it out .. can someone help me??? ..
try it with the escape routine in CGI.pm:
$value =~ s/([^a-zA-Z0-9_.-])/sprintf("%%%02X",ord($1))/eg;
tina
--
http://tinita.de \ enter__| |__the___ _ _ ___
tina's moviedatabase \ / _` / _ \/ _ \ '_(_-< of
search & add comments \ \ _,_\ __/\ __/_| /__/ perception
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 02:33:13 GMT
From: Bob Walton <bwalton@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Converting Char to Hex ..
Message-Id: <394C33DF.13864303@rochester.rr.com>
Gmo wrote:
...
> and does anyone know where i can go for questions about sql?
...
> Vincent ..
A search for "sql" in the names of newsgroups shows 77 such newsgroups.
Maybe one of those?
--
Bob Walton
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 09:51:42 +0930
From: Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <henry-EE8E0E.09514218062000@news.metropolis.net.au>
In article <8igq33$on3$1@news.NERO.NET>, stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
(John Stanley) wrote:
> And I expected you to think about the answers to the questions I asked
> and realize that you cannot achieve what you want here. You've got a bot
> that all articles are supposed to pass through. HOW do you get them to
> do that? Answer: you cannot. If you cannt get the articles through your
> bot, why keep yapping about it?
Alright, John. Since it doesn't look like you want to read the FAQs,
I'll explain the process to you. It'll only take a moment because it is
quite trivial...
Control codes are used to configure UseNet. More specifically, control
_headers_ are used to configure UseNet. Control headers are contained
in control messages. Control messages are, for the comp.* hierarchy,
generally sent out by the news.announce.newgroups moderator.
Once a RFD/CFV process is complete, the resolutions of that process (be
they creation, deletion, modification, whatever) are compiled into one
or more control messages by the nan moderator, and then posted to UseNet.
These control messages propogate in the usual way, to all reachable news
servers (most of which run INN). Upon receipt of a control message,
local INN servers implement the control request (be it creation,
deletion, modification, or whatever).
Local policy determines what control codes are accepted, just like local
policy determines what newsgroups are carried, and what groups are fed
to downstream servers. This is how local private groups remain private,
for example - INN simply refuses to forward posts to other servers that
request them. This is also the reason why some servers still carry old
groups, that should have died off ages ago - they are probably blocking
a subset of group deletion control codes.
One of the control codes can be used to instruct INN to intercept
postings to a newsgroup, and redirect them to an email address. This is
how moderated newsgroups work. Once the moderator approves the post,
he/she/it tweaks the headers to retain the original author's details and
posts the message to the group.
This process is completely invisible to the end user. They simply post
to the newsgroup as per normal. Depending on how moderation takes
place, there might nor even be a noticable delay between posting and
visibility. This is especially true if robomoderation is being used -
whereby a program processes the incoming email, automatically performs
the moderation functions, and then posts the message - all without human
involvement.
And that's all there is to it.
So, in this particular case, assuming we conducted a RFD/CFV by the
book, the nan moderator would then post a control message to UseNet.
This message would instruct all INN servers to modify their config so as
to redirect posts bound for clpm to an arbitrary email address instead.
A perl script, somewhere in the world, either continually running or
invoked by cron on a regular basis, would check that mailbox for
incoming posts. (Since the mailbox is protected with a
username/password combo, only the 'official' bot would be able to access
it.) The header would be examined and the email address of the poster
compared to those in a database (probably just a plain text file). If
the email address already existed in the database, the poster is not a
new poster, and the message would then be tweaked (headers reformatted)
and posted by the script to a convenient news server.
The post would propogate from that point to the rest of the world -
ultimately appearing on the news server of the original poster.
If the email address was not on file, it would indicate a new poster.
The perl script would respond with an advisory email, pointing to the
FAQs, and other online resources, and then save the post to a spool
file. On a regular basis, the script would check this spool file and
then post any items in it which are older than 8 days (or whatever).
Once such a post has been submitted, it is removed from the spool, the
email address gets added to the database, and from that point onwards,
the delay no longer affects that poster.
I really, really, really hope that you can see now how such a change is
not only possible, but (as far as the technical aspects go) verging on
the point of trivial. There would be no conditioning required of the
clpm membership - no-one would need to insert special headers, configure
their newsreader, or perform any such acrobatics in order for it to
work. One control message, one perl script, and it's done. Seamless.
This is not new, this is not even unusual. This is what newsmasters do
on a daily basis all around the world.
Your assertions that "It cannot be done!" are _totally_ without
foundation, and sound (to folks in my position) probably as ridiculous
as a newbie telling Abigail that it is absolutely impossible to sort an
array in Perl.
Now, ignoring _all_ of the technical implementation issues (as they have
already been solved (and probably were a decade or more ago)), do you
have any _constructive_ comments to make on my original proposal?
Henry.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jun 2000 00:47:10 GMT
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <8ih66e$rp9$1@news.NERO.NET>
In article <henry-EE8E0E.09514218062000@news.metropolis.net.au>,
Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net> wrote:
>In article <8igq33$on3$1@news.NERO.NET>, stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
>(John Stanley) wrote:
>> And I expected you to think about the answers to the questions I asked
>> and realize that you cannot achieve what you want here. You've got a bot
>> that all articles are supposed to pass through. HOW do you get them to
>> do that? Answer: you cannot. If you cannt get the articles through your
>> bot, why keep yapping about it?
>
>Alright, John. Since it doesn't look like you want to read the FAQs,
>I'll explain the process to you. It'll only take a moment because it is
>quite trivial...
Description of a long and complicated process which will not succeed the
vote and will not happen, deleted. A process which would result in the
formation of a different group than this one.
>And that's all there is to it.
That's not trivial. Not a single step of that is trivial.
>There would be no conditioning required of the
>clpm membership - no-one would need to insert special headers, configure
>their newsreader, or perform any such acrobatics in order for it to
>work. One control message, one perl script, and it's done. Seamless.
You have not yet shown how you intend on getting the group moderated.
You claim it would be a consensus decision of this group. It is not. It
requires a vote open to all of USENET. You must get it past us, and the
people in news.groups. They are going to ask why you want to remove the
last unmodertated USENET group for perl.
THEN you have to get all the servers in the world to convert the group,
which is unlikely to happen. Before it does happen, propogation of the
group will suffer. For God's sake, there are still servers hosting
comp.lang.perl. and a "control message" removed that group years ago.
>Your assertions that "It cannot be done!" are _totally_ without
>foundation,
I read this group. I've been through some of the many "let's moderate
this group" debates. Were it going to happen, it would have a long time
ago. Or are you deluded enough to think you the first one to suggest this?
Since you will never get this group changed, you will have to create a
DIFFERENT moderated group. Explain how YOUR system which simply delays
newbie FAQs for 8 days, is better than the current moderated group
system where every first time poster gets a pointer to the FAQ and
NOBODY's FAQ is posted at all. If you can possibly explain how it is
better, then you have to show there will be sufficient traffic to
justify the creation of a new group. Then you have to get the group
passed.
>Now, ignoring _all_ of the technical implementation issues (as they have
>already been solved (and probably were a decade or more ago)), do you
You have no clue. Please do not waste our time messing in what you don't
understand.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:47:45 -0700
From: "Godzilla!" <godzilla@stomp.stomp.tokyo>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <394C1C31.94405B5A@stomp.stomp.tokyo>
Henry wrote:
> > (John Stanley) wrote:
(snipped)
> Now, ignoring _all_ of the technical implementation issues...
> ...do you have any _constructive_ comments to make on my original
> proposal?
Yes, you appear to well know how to manipulate
a news feed to do whatever you want! Impressive.
However, concensus appears to be, people are quite
content with this newsgroup, as is. Seems a dead
issue despite your good intentions, don't you think?
Godzilla!
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 10:24:23 +0930
From: Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <henry-D3A2B5.10242318062000@news.metropolis.net.au>
In article <20000617162740.02983.00000434@ng-ch1.aol.com>,
db7654321@aol.comspamsux (David Bell) wrote:
> I couldn't resist replying to this one. :)
Ah, a lurker reveals himself!
(Well, it sounds like it, anyway. Sorry if I'm mistaken.)
> You have a very interesting argument here, and very true!
Thank you.
> But, what about the hybrid parasites? ...Like
> me: I will post a question to a newsgroup if I can't find my answer
> on the net, or if I'm new to the subject and don't know where to
> find informative websites.
> Once found, I will use the site as first priority, and if my question
> is not answered, I'll post. So, I guess I just start as a parasite,
> then start to contribute more once I gain knowledge.
...at which point you become an official newbie, a valued member of the
community, and your posts are not subject to any delay at all. Correct.
> As for a delay, I strongly disagree.
Care to share your _reasons_ for "strongly" disagreeing with a once-off
delay on your very first post?
> I think if newbies knew about great sites like:
> http://www.perlfaq.com/ they'd prefer to find their answers there.
You would think so, wouldn't you. But then again, the site's relatively
new, and hence isn't widely linked to yet. It's only just made it into
the Perl FAQ pointer that Tom Phoenix posts here on a regular basis.
> That might just be from my own experience though.
Agents (search engines, bots, whatever) are very popular, so you're
definitely not alone on that count. We need
Glad you joined the thread.
Henry.
PS: Hey, Tom! Y'reckon it would make much difference if, instead of
using "Pointer to the Perl FAQ..." (or whatever) as the subject line for
your regular post, that you gave it a more utilitarian title - like
"NEWBIES: READ THIS, THEN TRY http://www.perlfaq.com/ BEFORE POSTING!"
Hmmm?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:46:22 -0400
From: brian@smithrenaud.com (brian d foy)
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <brian-ya02408000R1706002146220001@news.panix.com>
In article <henry-EE8E0E.09514218062000@news.metropolis.net.au>, Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net> posted:
> In article <8igq33$on3$1@news.NERO.NET>, stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
> (John Stanley) wrote:
>
> > And I expected you to think about the answers to the questions I asked
> > and realize that you cannot achieve what you want here. You've got a bot
> > that all articles are supposed to pass through. HOW do you get them to
> > do that? Answer: you cannot. If you cannt get the articles through your
> > bot, why keep yapping about it?
>
> Alright, John. Since it doesn't look like you want to read the FAQs,
> I'll explain the process to you. It'll only take a moment because it is
> quite trivial...
or, you can just use proof by example -
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi is moderated by a bot.
i doubt, based on it's effectiveness, that it would not solve
the problem we have here though.
--
brian d foy
CGI Meta FAQ <URL:http://www.smithrenaud.com/public/CGI_MetaFAQ.html>
Perl Mongers <URL:http://www.perl.org/>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 11:25:53 +0930
From: Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <henry-C0ECB3.11255318062000@news.metropolis.net.au>
In article <8ih66e$rp9$1@news.NERO.NET>, stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU
(John Stanley) wrote:
>> Alright, John. Since it doesn't look like you want to read the FAQs,
>> I'll explain the process to you. It'll only take a moment because it
>> is quite trivial...
>
> Description of a long and complicated process which will not succeed
> the vote and will not happen, deleted.
Whether or not the proposal would succeed or not is a different issue.
The reason for my post was to address the misinformation that you were
spreading. Specifically, your baseless assertion that it could not be
done.
> A process which would result in the formation of a different group
> than this one.
Wrong again. A RFD/CFV can be used to submit a modification to an
existing group. comp.lang.perl.misc could be modified to incorporate
the functionality described _without_ even needing a name change.
>> And that's all there is to it.
>
> That's not trivial. Not a single step of that is trivial.
I'm sorry you are challenged by the details. Perhaps you should migrate
your career towards something less mentally demanding - pottery, perhaps?
> You have not yet shown how you intend on getting the group moderated.
My previous post outlined _exactly_ how this group would become
'moderated'. What part of it didn't you understand?
> You claim it would be a consensus decision of this group.
I did no such thing. I said that the _parameters_ that the _bot_ uses
would be determined by group consensus (ie. how many days the new
posters' posts should be delayed).
At no point did I even come close to suggesting that group consensus
could be used to subvert the proper RFD/CFV process, and for you to
insinuate otherwise would be _wrong_.
> THEN you have to get all the servers in the world to convert the
> group, which is unlikely to happen.
Actually, most newsmasters are much more strict on the create/delete
codes than the modify codes. If a server is currently carrying clpm, it
is _highly_ likely that it would honour such a request.
> Before it does happen, propogation of the group will suffer.
No it won't. Why do you fabricate stuff like this? If a server
_hasn't_ received the control message, it will allow posts
as-per-normal. If a server _has_ received the control message, then
apart from the email leg of the journey, there will be no added
propogation delay at all.
Please stop inventing imaginary technical flaws where none exist.
> For God's sake, there are still servers hosting comp.lang.perl.
> and a "control message" removed that group years ago.
This is the second time you've said that. Running low on arguments?
> I read this group. I've been through some of the many "let's
> moderate this group" debates. Were it going to happen, it would
> have a long time ago.
Oh, so you're one of those "Everything that can _possibly_ be invented
has _already_ been invented" types?
Har, har!
> Or are you deluded enough to think you the first one to suggest
> this?
I spent a couple of hours researching this topic, and _nowhere_ did I
find a reference which even remotely resembled setting up a delay on the
first post submitted by new posters to a group.
Plenty of structures for moderation panels, and so forth, but nothing
like what I'm proposing.
I may not be the first one to suggest this strategy, but I'm not aware
of anyone else who has. If you know different, then I'd love to see a
reference.
> Since you will never get this group changed, you will have to
> create a DIFFERENT moderated group.
Once again, the success/failure of the RFD/CFV process is not at issue,
and there is no problem at all in modifying the group config to comply
with passed resolutions.
> Explain how YOUR system which simply delays
> newbie FAQs for 8 days, is better than the current moderated group
> system where every first time poster gets a pointer to the FAQ and
> NOBODY's FAQ is posted at all.
As I'm sure I've said on two previous occasions, it goes without saying
that the newbie would get an instant response from the bot saying that
their message was being placed in a queue. That message would also
contain a pointer to the FAQ and to other online resources, so that the
first-time poster could help themselves in the interim.
As for comparisons between clp.moderated and my proposed system, what
can I say except that clp.moderated is "censored" and my proposed system
isn't. That makes it a lot better as far as I'm concerned.
> If you can possibly explain how it is better,
> then you have to show there will be sufficient traffic to
> justify the creation of a new group.
We wouldn't be creating a new group. I wish you'd pay attention.
> Then you have to get the group passed.
Well, then the proposal for modifications needs to be formalised and a
RFD initiated. The usual processes take it from there.
>> Now, ignoring _all_ of the technical implementation issues (as they
>> have already been solved (and probably were a decade or more ago)),
>
> You have no clue.
All of your arguments have been systematically decimated. Your complete
lack of knowledge in the processes involved has been unmasked. Your
tendency to fabricate imaginary technical problems has been well noted.
How do you expect anyone to take what you say seriously?
> Please do not waste our time messing in what you don't understand.
I see no-one else fabricating and arguing about imaginary technical
flaws but you.
Henry.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 11:46:16 +0930
From: Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <henry-AEB721.11461618062000@news.metropolis.net.au>
In article <394C1C31.94405B5A@stomp.stomp.tokyo>, "Godzilla!"
<godzilla@stomp.stomp.tokyo> wrote:
> Yes, you appear to well know how to manipulate
> a news feed to do whatever you want! Impressive.
> However, concensus appears to be, people are quite
> content with this newsgroup, as is. Seems a dead
> issue despite your good intentions, don't you think?
I'm quite pleased that no-one has attacked the foundation of my proposal
(everything leading up to "Parasites are the enemy!"). That would seem
to indicate that, at the very least, I am standing on solid ground.
I persist with defending it against all comers for two simple reasons:
1) If it _has_ got a solid foundation, and if it has no intrinsic flaw,
then perhaps it is simply an idea who's time has not yet come?
Popularity is like a tide - it falls, but it also rises.
2) By keeping this issue alive (for as long as possible) I give it more
of a chance to sink into the mind of the reader. Thus even if my
original proposal fails, I increase the likelihood that someone will
come after me, and launch on a different tack, using the same foundation.
My personal success, right here, right now, is irrelevant.
Henry.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 12:00:46 +0930
From: Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net>
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <henry-8099B1.12004618062000@news.metropolis.net.au>
In article <brian-ya02408000R1706002146220001@news.panix.com>,
brian@smithrenaud.com (brian d foy) wrote:
> or, you can just use proof by example -
>
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi is moderated by a bot.
>
> i doubt, based on it's effectiveness, that it would not solve
> the problem we have here though.
[I assume you meant "...that it _would_ solve..."]
The ciwac bot immediately rejects a post from new users and provides the
with instructions for bypassing the restriction. They can then insert
"passme" in the very first messages and have it go though.
Thus that bot is a 5-minute hinderance.
A parasite will easily give up 5 minutes if it will save him 30 minutes
or an hour worth of looking through FAQs.
The reward equation needs to be turned around to such a degree that
their impatience can be used against them. I consider to be totally
ineffectual any amounts less than 8-hours (one night's sleep).
48 hours, a full weekend, is what I would consider to be the minimum -
as that means a problem discovered on a Friday night couldn't be
submitted to the drones at clpm for resolution until after the weekend,
by which time the buzz will be over.
8 days (a week +1 day), would be _infuriating_ (which is why it would be
my recommendation).
There is, however, no reason why the delay couldn't be started at an
arbitrary amount, and then increased or decreased depending upon the
perceived effectiveness.
Henry.
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jun 2000 22:57:07 EDT
From: abigail@delanet.com (Abigail)
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <slrn8kofm3.ojo.abigail@alexandra.delanet.com>
Henry (henry@penninkilampi.net) wrote on MMCDLXXXIII September MCMXCIII
in <URL:news:henry-8099B1.12004618062000@news.metropolis.net.au>:
##
## The ciwac bot immediately rejects a post from new users and provides the
## with instructions for bypassing the restriction. They can then insert
## "passme" in the very first messages and have it go though.
##
## Thus that bot is a 5-minute hinderance.
##
## A parasite will easily give up 5 minutes if it will save him 30 minutes
## or an hour worth of looking through FAQs.
##
## The reward equation needs to be turned around to such a degree that
## their impatience can be used against them. I consider to be totally
## ineffectual any amounts less than 8-hours (one night's sleep).
##
## 48 hours, a full weekend, is what I would consider to be the minimum -
## as that means a problem discovered on a Friday night couldn't be
## submitted to the drones at clpm for resolution until after the weekend,
## by which time the buzz will be over.
##
## 8 days (a week +1 day), would be _infuriating_ (which is why it would be
## my recommendation).
But, exactly, what posts is it going to stop? If someone doesn't lurk
in the group first, and just asks a FAQ, that posting isn't going to
be stopped. It comes to the group after 8 days anyhow, after which
it gets answered, while the posters no longer is interested in finding
the answer. And any subsequent posting of such a person isn't delayed,
as only someone's first posting will be delayed. What will happen is
an increase of people that keep hitting the post button because their
posting doesn't show up instantly.
It might stop someone who first looks around in the group, lurking,
as (s)he will be aware of the procedures. But then it's stopping someone
who is likely to be a good contributor to the group.
I can only see your proposal as something that decreases the signal to
noise ratio.
Once again, I suggest you create a new group where you can test out
your suggested practise. If it's effective, people will migrate from
this group to yours. If it's not, this group hasn't been ruined.
Abigail
--
package Just_another_Perl_Hacker; sub print {($_=$_[0])=~ s/_/ /g;
print } sub __PACKAGE__ { &
print ( __PACKAGE__)} &
__PACKAGE__
( )
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 23:07:13 -0400
From: brian@smithrenaud.com (brian d foy)
Subject: Re: Crazy enough that it might just work...
Message-Id: <brian-ya02408000R1706002307130001@news.panix.com>
In article <henry-8099B1.12004618062000@news.metropolis.net.au>, Henry <henry@penninkilampi.net> posted:
> In article <brian-ya02408000R1706002146220001@news.panix.com>,
> brian@smithrenaud.com (brian d foy) wrote:
>
> > or, you can just use proof by example -
> >
> > comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi is moderated by a bot.
> >
> > i doubt, based on it's effectiveness, that it would not solve
> > the problem we have here though.
>
> [I assume you meant "...that it _would_ solve..."]
ah, yes.
> The ciwac bot immediately rejects a post from new users and provides the
> with instructions for bypassing the restriction. They can then insert
> "passme" in the very first messages and have it go though.
it doesn't matter what it does. it is a bot though, and that was
my point.
--
brian d foy
CGI Meta FAQ <URL:http://www.smithrenaud.com/public/CGI_MetaFAQ.html>
Perl Mongers <URL:http://www.perl.org/>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 21:56:42 -0400
From: Julian Cook/Sherab Gyatso <president@webticker.com>
Subject: Current time minus file's datestamp time
Message-Id: <394C2C5A.FCE8B808@webticker.com>
Howdy folks!
I have posted a few questions here and everyone is very helpful. My
quandry
right now is checking a file's date and then update it if it's older
than an hour.
We keep a text file that is updated once a day manually but we would
like to make
this automatic by a time check routine.
That is
1. Check current time
2. Subtract file's last modified time
3. Older than an hour?
Yes - Start Update Routine
I checked the FAQ and got the really nifty routine below.....
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
use File::stat;
use Time::localtime;
$file="general.txt";
$date_string = ctime(stat($file)->mtime);
print "$date_string\n";
This does a great job with getting a file's timestamp but I need to
figure the time between this and the current time and start an update
perhaps in seconds or minutes if it's aged a certain amount.
Many thanks in advance for your assistance.
Julian Cook
president@webticker.com
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 19:12:54 -0700
From: Tom Phoenix <rootbeer@redcat.com>
Subject: Re: Current time minus file's datestamp time
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10006171910240.21108-100000@user2.teleport.com>
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Julian Cook/Sherab Gyatso wrote:
> Newsgroups: comp.lang.perl.misc, comp.lang.perl
If your news administrator still carries comp.lang.perl, please let him
or her know that that newsgroup has not existed since 1995. If you
have such an outdated newsgroup listing, you are probably missing out
on many other valid newsgroups as well. You'll be doing yourself and
many others a favor to use only comp.lang.perl.misc (and other valid
Perl newsgroups) instead.
> This does a great job with getting a file's timestamp but I need to
> figure the time between this and the current time and start an update
> perhaps in seconds or minutes if it's aged a certain amount.
How about using the -M filetest, which measures the age in days? If you
multiply by 24, you'll have the age in hours. Converting that to include
minutes and seconds shouldn't be needed, but it wouldn't be hard to do.
See the perlfunc manpage.
Cheers!
--
Tom Phoenix Perl Training and Hacking Esperanto
Randal Schwartz Case: http://www.rahul.net/jeffrey/ovs/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 02:23:45 GMT
From: Bob Walton <bwalton@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Current time minus file's datestamp time
Message-Id: <394C31A6.1135C0D4@rochester.rr.com>
Julian Cook/Sherab Gyatso wrote:
...
> right now is checking a file's date and then update it if it's older
> than an hour.
> We keep a text file that is updated once a day manually but we would
> like to make
> this automatic by a time check routine.
>
> That is
>
> 1. Check current time
> 2. Subtract file's last modified time
> 3. Older than an hour?
> Yes - Start Update Routine
>
> I checked the FAQ and got the really nifty routine below.....
>
> #!/usr/local/bin/perl
> use File::stat;
> use Time::localtime;
> $file="general.txt";
> $date_string = ctime(stat($file)->mtime);
> print "$date_string\n";
>
> This does a great job with getting a file's timestamp but I need to
> figure the time between this and the current time and start an update
> perhaps in seconds or minutes if it's aged a certain amount.
...
> Julian Cook
> president@webticker.com
Well, just using the -M function is even easier:
&start_update_routine if -M "filename.ext">0.04167;
Note, though, that this gives the time in fractional days between the
file's age and the time your script was started. So if you run your
script once and loop forever with a sleep, this method won't be good.
But you shouldn't do it that way -- use your OS's scheduling utilities
to run your script periodically.
--
Bob Walton
------------------------------
Date: 16 Sep 99 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 16 Sep 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.
| NOTE: The mail to news gateway, and thus the ability to submit articles
| through this service to the newsgroup, has been removed. I do not have
| time to individually vet each article to make sure that someone isn't
| abusing the service, and I no longer have any desire to waste my time
| dealing with the campus admins when some fool complains to them about an
| article that has come through the gateway instead of complaining
| to the source.
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.
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 3406
**************************************
