From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25869 invoked by alias); 1 Apr 2005 00:52:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25774 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2005 00:52:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO bluesmobile.specifixinc.com) (64.220.152.98) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2005 00:52:23 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bluesmobile.corp.specifixinc.com [192.168.1.2]) by bluesmobile.specifixinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD98316792 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:52:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: rms asking about badspammer.html From: James E Wilson To: overseers@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1112316742.3679.39.camel@aretha.corp.specifixinc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:52:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00000.txt.bz2 rms saw a user bug report about the badspammer.html file on gcc.gnu.org, and started asking the GCC SC about it. We told him it was to frustrate spam bots, and users with properly working browsers should never see it. Now rms is asking how effective it is, who wrote it, whether they can use it on other GNU servers, etc. These are questions the GCC SC can't answer. Anyone want to take this up with rms? Or give us some pointers where to look for more info? The user incidentally was using a web download accelerator, GetRight (www.getright.com), which has some interesting features, but apparently also a few bugs. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.SpecifixInc.com