From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out-no.shaw.ca (smtp-out-no.shaw.ca [64.59.134.9]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30C40384B0C1 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:34:02 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 30C40384B0C1 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=SystematicSw.ab.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=brian.inglis@systematicsw.ab.ca Received: from [192.168.1.104] ([24.64.172.44]) by shaw.ca with ESMTP id QxiZjWLTr62brQxiajRWCW; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:34:00 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=LKf9vKe9 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=kiZT5GMN3KAWqtYcXc+/4Q==:117 a=kiZT5GMN3KAWqtYcXc+/4Q==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=w_pzkKWiAAAA:8 a=fjDFcf429ns8VtWUCqQA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=sRI3_1zDfAgwuvI8zelB:22 From: Brian Inglis Subject: Re: Two naive questions Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20200417174902.GA32412@iguana.crashland.org> <169450016.20200417211620@yandex.ru> <20200420172017.GA17660@iguana.crashland.org> <9d2da84a-61db-ea3e-a70b-9e8b2e42fe4f@SystematicSw.ab.ca> <20200420201404.GB10790@cgf.cx> Autocrypt: addr=Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEXopx8xYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAnCK0qv/xwUCCZQoA9BHRYpstERrspfT0NkUWQVuoePa0 LkJyaWFuIEluZ2xpcyA8QnJpYW4uSW5nbGlzQFN5c3RlbWF0aWNTdy5hYi5jYT6IlgQTFggA PhYhBMM5/lbU970GBS2bZB62lxu92I8YBQJeinHzAhsDBQkJZgGABQsJCAcCBhUKCQgLAgQW AgMBAh4BAheAAAoJEB62lxu92I8Y0ioBAI8xrggNxziAVmr+Xm6nnyjoujMqWcq3oEhlYGAO WacZAQDFtdDx2koSVSoOmfaOyRTbIWSf9/Cjai29060fsmdsDLg4BF6KcfMSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0Awv8kHI2PaEgViDqzbnoe8B9KMHoBZLS92HdC7ZPh8HQMBCAeIfgQYFggAJhYhBMM5 /lbU970GBS2bZB62lxu92I8YBQJeinHzAhsMBQkJZgGAAAoJEB62lxu92I8YZwUBAJw/74rF IyaSsGI7ewCdCy88Lce/kdwX7zGwid+f8NZ3AQC/ezTFFi5obXnyMxZJN464nPXiggtT9gN5 RSyTY8X+AQ== Organization: Systematic Software Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 12:33:59 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200420201404.GB10790@cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfME2ZAYY8xsJAQPbErTomFVfcWtmUi2ALUtLlMezNv8gyaQtsRmbhRyWJeh/ATmdmXTMU/h5eTxEamC/EfMCMyDsyV20e6CeoG2XONi8Xl8y5rZ3r6ba QfyMYGEvy4Lyk2kv/0Nmq+lRU0NwbWRS4+plyEC/e7PYF8IdeYf4Zw/eF018x+LRrc1MuexblGviPw== X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:34:03 -0000 On 2020-04-20 14:14, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:59:08AM -0600, Brian Inglis wrote: >> The new server ml archive does not seem to offer the metadata available on the >> previous server and archive, and that is true of most archives that do not allow >> replies: probably a good way to reduce space required by 50-90%, from what I can >> see. >> A subscribed user could provide you with the reply References header values. > This is a text cut and paste from https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/ > The Cygwin Archives > You can get more information about this list. > Archive View by: Downloadable version > April 2020: [ Thread ] [ Subject ] [ Author ] [ Date ] [ Gzip'd Text 110 KB ] > Notice the "Gzip'd Text ..."? > That's the mbox formatted email archives. I imported them all into Thunderbird to be able to search locally, as all archive search tools seem to be worse than any of the search sites in determining relevance or providing *all* relevant results newest first, while the builtin tools allow searching on header field combos, and there is always grep/sed/awk thru the mozmsgs maildirs for the really fuzzy searches. Your previous reply was probably the best that can be done with pipermail archives on mailman 2.1, although I am surprised you did not go to mailman 3 with hyperkitty on the new servers. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised.