sources.redhat.com is up

sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

web and ssh seem to work without hitches.

email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
daemon to restart or something?

Kerberos I don't even plan to touch at the moment :-).

Any volunteers to test GNATS and other things?

At the moment I'm off to catch a plane, but here's the todo list as I
see it:

1.  Get email working.

2.  Do a bit of s/sourceware/sources/

3.  Send announcement to sourceware.cygnus.com and the web page.

sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

web and ssh seem to work without hitches.

email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
daemon to restart or something?

Kerberos I don't even plan to touch at the moment :-).

Any volunteers to test GNATS and other things?

At the moment I'm off to catch a plane, but here's the todo list as I
see it:

1.  Get email working.

2.  Do a bit of s/sourceware/sources/

3.  Send announcement to sourceware.cygnus.com and the web page.

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Jim Kingdon wrote:
> 2.  Do a bit of s/sourceware/sources/

Not a big deal, but the ht://Dig configs for the sourceware side need to
be tweaked.  A note to overseers in advance with the switchover time would
give me enough time, assuming the switchover happens some time the next
three weeks.

The changes are trivial, you just have to know it has to be done and not
forget it. :-)

brgds, H-P
PS.  I'll try to fix some ht://Dig sourdoughs this weekend.

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Jim Kingdon wrote:
> 2.  Do a bit of s/sourceware/sources/

Not a big deal, but the ht://Dig configs for the sourceware side need to
be tweaked.  A note to overseers in advance with the switchover time would
give me enough time, assuming the switchover happens some time the next
three weeks.

The changes are trivial, you just have to know it has to be done and not
forget it. :-)

brgds, H-P
PS.  I'll try to fix some ht://Dig sourdoughs this weekend.

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 200006291427.KAA00384@devserv.devel.redhat.com >you write:
  > web and ssh seem to work without hitches.
  > 
  > email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
  > in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
  > daemon to restart or something?
Most likely.

  > Kerberos I don't even plan to touch at the moment :-).
We need it to work.  Many of the Cygnus folks are using Kerberos to access
that machine.

  > Any volunteers to test GNATS and other things?
I can handle FOM when the time comes.

jeff

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 200006291427.KAA00384@devserv.devel.redhat.com >you write:
  > web and ssh seem to work without hitches.
  > 
  > email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
  > in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
  > daemon to restart or something?
Most likely.

  > Kerberos I don't even plan to touch at the moment :-).
We need it to work.  Many of the Cygnus folks are using Kerberos to access
that machine.

  > Any volunteers to test GNATS and other things?
I can handle FOM when the time comes.

jeff

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

>  > email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
>  > in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
>  > daemon to restart or something?

Yup.  This was it (kill -HUP on qmail-send, as described in "man
qmail-send").

I've made the switch on the web pages (take a look at
http://sources.redhat.com/ ).  I've also updated
http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
exists now.  Services like Kerberos and htdig should work but may need
to use the old name.

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

>  > email to sources.redhat.com is broken; qmail complains about not being
>  > in the locals file but I did edit /qmail/control/locals.  Is there a
>  > daemon to restart or something?

Yup.  This was it (kill -HUP on qmail-send, as described in "man
qmail-send").

I've made the switch on the web pages (take a look at
http://sources.redhat.com/ ).  I've also updated
http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
exists now.  Services like Kerberos and htdig should work but may need
to use the old name.

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jason Molenda]

On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 01:23:49AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote:

> I've also updated
> http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
> exists now.  

Hm.  Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
world and all its search engines like it is now.  It's (obviously)
an open list with no limited membership or mailing list archive
visibility, but up to now it's been unlinked from the outside world.

I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
list.

J / secretly-a-cabal-lover

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jason Molenda]

On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 01:23:49AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote:

> I've also updated
> http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
> exists now.  

Hm.  Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
world and all its search engines like it is now.  It's (obviously)
an open list with no limited membership or mailing list archive
visibility, but up to now it's been unlinked from the outside world.

I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
list.

J / secretly-a-cabal-lover

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Chris Faylor]

On Sat, Jul 01, 2000 at 11:11:50PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 01:23:49AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote:
>
>> I've also updated
>> http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
>> exists now.  
>
>Hm.  Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
>world and all its search engines like it is now.  It's (obviously)
>an open list with no limited membership or mailing list archive
>visibility, but up to now it's been unlinked from the outside world.
>
>I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
>doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
>list.

Hmm.  I can't imagine *anyone* sending stuff like that.  Why, that
would be completely clueless.

Oh.  Wait.  Now that you mention it, I guess I can imagine this.

cgf

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Chris Faylor]

On Sat, Jul 01, 2000 at 11:11:50PM -0700, Jason Molenda wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 02, 2000 at 01:23:49AM -0400, Jim Kingdon wrote:
>
>> I've also updated
>> http://sources.redhat.com/sourceware/rename.html with the status as it
>> exists now.  
>
>Hm.  Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
>world and all its search engines like it is now.  It's (obviously)
>an open list with no limited membership or mailing list archive
>visibility, but up to now it's been unlinked from the outside world.
>
>I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
>doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
>list.

Hmm.  I can't imagine *anyone* sending stuff like that.  Why, that
would be completely clueless.

Oh.  Wait.  Now that you mention it, I guess I can imagine this.

cgf

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

> Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
> world and all its search engines like it is now.

OK, I've gotten rid of the link from index.html.  The main reason I
linked to that page was that I wanted to avoid a flurry of reports for
problems we already know about.  But I guess that isn't a big risk.

> I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
> doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
> list.

We get a lot of that at sourcemaster and although they don't take long
to answer (one sentence, "use the mailing list, I'm just the
sysadmin"), yeah, we'd rather have people find the mailing lists in
the first place.  

To that end, I've reworded http://sources.redhat.com/suggestions.html
a bit.  Don't know if that page is what is directing people to
sourcemaster but it has to be something like that.  In my experience
as a webmaster, people rarely send in that kind of query without the
web site somehow making the address prominent (if it is 4 clicks from
the front page, they won't get there, search engines or no search
engines).

> secretly-a-cabal-lover

I don't think I should touch that one :-).

Incidentally, I'm now back in the Bay Area (for good), so give me a
call sometime (I especially mean Jason, but the rest of you too if
you feel so inclined).

Re: sources.redhat.com is up

[Jim Kingdon]

> Just MHO, but I wouldn't expose the overseers list to the
> world and all its search engines like it is now.

OK, I've gotten rid of the link from index.html.  The main reason I
linked to that page was that I wanted to avoid a flurry of reports for
problems we already know about.  But I guess that isn't a big risk.

> I guess I have visions of people sending bug reports ("Cygnus ls
> doesn't list my files on my DOS 3.2 partition!") and such to the
> list.

We get a lot of that at sourcemaster and although they don't take long
to answer (one sentence, "use the mailing list, I'm just the
sysadmin"), yeah, we'd rather have people find the mailing lists in
the first place.  

To that end, I've reworded http://sources.redhat.com/suggestions.html
a bit.  Don't know if that page is what is directing people to
sourcemaster but it has to be something like that.  In my experience
as a webmaster, people rarely send in that kind of query without the
web site somehow making the address prominent (if it is 4 clicks from
the front page, they won't get there, search engines or no search
engines).

> secretly-a-cabal-lover

I don't think I should touch that one :-).

Incidentally, I'm now back in the Bay Area (for good), so give me a
call sometime (I especially mean Jason, but the rest of you too if
you feel so inclined).