[Mailman-Developers] bin/arch: a bug or not?
Barry A. Warsaw
Tue, 13 Aug 2002 12:50:45 -0400
>>>>> "SP" == Simone Piunno <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> SP> Is this the intended behaviour?
>> IMO, no, but it's the way it's worked for ages.
SP> it could be a mitigating factor for people forced to rebuild
SP> the archive, becase having the old messages in place you can
SP> still serve people coming through external search engines (at
SP> the cost of wasting disk space).
If I want to regenerate from scratch (as I do when I'm hacking on the
scrubber :), I've always just blown away archives/private/<listname>/*
and then re-run bin/arch.
A related question is whether you'll always get the same message
numbers when you regenerate from scratch. I think you would, but
haven't checked. Caveat doing something like bin/cleanarch over an
old archive. ;(
SP> I think this behaviour could be documented as a feature :)
Best would be to add a switch to bin/arch to do a regen from scratch.