Mailman 3 April 2000 - Mailman-Developers

y2k problem with pipermail/python
by Ron Jarrell 27 Apr '00

27 Apr '00

Not really mailman's fault, but the archiving process dies a horribly flaming death if some bozo is using a client that sticks "100" in as the year (because the author never read the man page for tm...) I've *still* got users, it seems using those. Like one I just emailed suggesting he get off of elm 2.4pl25. I noticed this whan trying to redo a couple of archives, arch was blowing up starting in january. The mailbox dateconverstion routine can't cope. Ideally, since it's a known problem, a special case ought to be made mapping dates in the second century to the 21st century :-).

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Beta2 - Bug in archiver?
by Dan Mick 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

I can't find anything anywhere in 2.0beta2 that defines "SetHeader()". That could be a problem. Archiver.py is not supposed to call SetHeader() anymore, but apparently, as of 2.0beta2, it still does. It appears to be fixed in revision 1.21 of Archiver.py. I guess 2.0beta2 is just broken in this respect. The newer Archiver.py uses "post['Date'] = time.ctime(time.time())" in place of "post.SetHeader..." diff -r1.20 -r1.21 160c160 < post.SetHeader('Date', time.ctime(time.time())) --- > post['Date'] = time.ctime(time.time()) 173c173 < post.SetHeader('Date', olddate) --- > post['Date'] = olddate 192c192 < if mm_cfg.ARCHIVE_TO_MBOX == -1: --- > if mm_cfg.ARCHIVE_TO_MBOX == -1 or not self.archive: (There's also a revision 1.22, so I don't really advocate using this..) > I've poked at this a little but I'm not making any headway. Not being very > python literate, it's probably something simple that I'm missing. Nontheless, I > figured I'd bounce it off the experts.... > > This is 2.0Beta2 running under Mandrake Linux on a PIII with sendmail 8.9.3. > Python version is: Python 1.5.2 (#1, Apr 25 2000, 12:39:13) [GCC pgcc-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 on linux2 > > Seems to be a hole somewhere related to the date parsing code in the archiver. > > In logs/error I get the following traceback whenever a message is posted to the list: > > Apr 25 16:35:05 2000 post(28927): Traceback (innermost last): > post(28927): File "/home/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/Archiver.py", line 204, in ArchiveMail > post(28927): self.__archive_to_mbox(msg) > post(28927): File "/home/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/Archiver.py", line 160, in __archive_to_mbox > post(28927): post.SetHeader('Date', time.ctime(time.time())) > post(28927): AttributeError: SetHeader > > The message gets forwarded to the list correctly. It just doesn't get archived. > > For what it's worth.... the message looks like this when it comes through the > list. I don't see anything abviously broken in the headers: > > From f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com Wed Apr 26 15:26:48 2000 > Return-Path: <f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com> > Received: from o6.proadmin.com (o6.proadmin.com [208.195.160.175]) > by o3.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA28760 > for <edc(a)proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:48 -0700 > Received: from o6.proadmin.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by o6.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA00608 > for <edc(a)proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:48 -0700 > Received: from o3.proadmin.com ([199.108.70.172]) > by o6.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA00603 > for <f500(a)o6.proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:47 -0700 > Received: (from edc@localhost) > by o3.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) id PAA28756 > for f500(a)o6.proadmin.com; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:42 -0700 > Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:42 -0700 > From: "Eric D. Christensen" <edc(a)ns.proadmin.com> > Message-Id: <200004262226.PAA28756(a)o3.proadmin.com> > To: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com > Subject: [F500] test from unix > Sender: f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com > Errors-To: f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com > X-BeenThere: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com > X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2 > Precedence: bulk > Reply-To: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com > List-Id: The Formula 500 Mailing List <f500.o6.proadmin.com> > > test > _______________________________________________ > F500 mailing list > F500(a)o6.proadmin.com > http://216.139.10.131/mailman/listinfo/f500 > > > Any clues would be appreciated - since I obviously don't have one! :-) > > -- > ====================================================== > Eric D. Christensen ProAdmin, Inc. > Email: edc(a)proadmin.com http://www.proadmin.com > Phone: 408-776-3410 Fax: 408-776-3420 > ====================================================== > > _______________________________________________ > Mailman-Developers mailing list > Mailman-Developers(a)python.org > http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers

2 1

Beta2 - Bug in archiver?
by Eric D. Christensen 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

I've poked at this a little but I'm not making any headway. Not being very python literate, it's probably something simple that I'm missing. Nontheless, I figured I'd bounce it off the experts.... This is 2.0Beta2 running under Mandrake Linux on a PIII with sendmail 8.9.3. Python version is: Python 1.5.2 (#1, Apr 25 2000, 12:39:13) [GCC pgcc-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 on linux2 Seems to be a hole somewhere related to the date parsing code in the archiver. In logs/error I get the following traceback whenever a message is posted to the list: Apr 25 16:35:05 2000 post(28927): Traceback (innermost last): post(28927): File "/home/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/Archiver.py", line 204, in ArchiveMail post(28927): self.__archive_to_mbox(msg) post(28927): File "/home/mailman/Mailman/Archiver/Archiver.py", line 160, in __archive_to_mbox post(28927): post.SetHeader('Date', time.ctime(time.time())) post(28927): AttributeError: SetHeader The message gets forwarded to the list correctly. It just doesn't get archived. For what it's worth.... the message looks like this when it comes through the list. I don't see anything abviously broken in the headers: From f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com Wed Apr 26 15:26:48 2000 Return-Path: <f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com> Received: from o6.proadmin.com (o6.proadmin.com [208.195.160.175]) by o3.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA28760 for <edc(a)proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:48 -0700 Received: from o6.proadmin.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by o6.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA00608 for <edc(a)proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:48 -0700 Received: from o3.proadmin.com ([199.108.70.172]) by o6.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) with ESMTP id PAA00603 for <f500(a)o6.proadmin.com>; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:47 -0700 Received: (from edc@localhost) by o3.proadmin.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ProAdmin) id PAA28756 for f500(a)o6.proadmin.com; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:42 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:26:42 -0700 From: "Eric D. Christensen" <edc(a)ns.proadmin.com> Message-Id: <200004262226.PAA28756(a)o3.proadmin.com> To: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com Subject: [F500] test from unix Sender: f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com Errors-To: f500-admin(a)o6.proadmin.com X-BeenThere: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: f500(a)o6.proadmin.com List-Id: The Formula 500 Mailing List <f500.o6.proadmin.com> test _______________________________________________ F500 mailing list F500(a)o6.proadmin.com http://216.139.10.131/mailman/listinfo/f500 Any clues would be appreciated - since I obviously don't have one! :-) -- ====================================================== Eric D. Christensen ProAdmin, Inc. Email: edc(a)proadmin.com http://www.proadmin.com Phone: 408-776-3410 Fax: 408-776-3420 ======================================================

1 0

A few mailman issues
by Marc Merlin 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

1) arch eats up all my memory and hangs when processing a message that has a 12MB attachment (my machine has 1G of memory) 2) When mailman creates an archive mbox file, it puts a empty line at the beginning. This is annoying as it prevents me from doing mutt -f list.mbox 3) It would be really cool if the admin web interface would let me click on a link to edit the held message (headers and body) before I approve it (in a textarea) Thanks, Marc -- Microsoft is to software what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ (friendly to non IE browsers) Finger marc_f(a)merlins.org for PGP key and other contact information

5 6

Re: [Mailman-Developers] A few mailman issues
by J C Lawrence 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 09:39:38 +0200 (CEST) Dan Ohnesorg <dan(a)feld.cvut.cz> wrote: > I think, the pipermail should be definietly removed from > mailman. It is mutch better to use some external archiver. You > will have match more stable mailman without pipermail. While I agree that Pipermail is feture poor and, umm, in general sucks, there is also a definite value to having an archiver, even such a poor one, be an implicit part of Mailman -- if only for new list admins who instantly get something that is *usable* (if not friendly) and thereby can instantly have their lists archived and indexed without having to confront the complexities of MHonArc or Hypermail. I consider Pipermail to be one of the features of Mailman which make it is easily recommendable to new list admins: -- they get instant if minimal archiving functionality -- by default all their list mail is preserved in a portable/standardised format (mbox) -- it is very easy to later put in a more full featured archiver ala MHonArc/Hypermail. -- If/when they do move to an external archiver, their old mail is preserved in a form easy to run thru the new archiving system to gen the new archives. > When someone will corect my poor english, I can write > mailman-archiving howto for mailman-MHonArc cooperation. Sure. -- J C Lawrence Internet: claw(a)kanga.nu ----------(*) Internet: coder(a)kanga.nu ...Honorary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...

3 2

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Change to acceptable_aliases
by J C Lawrence 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 12:01:13 -0500 (CDT) Christopher Lindsey <lindsey(a)ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote: >> allow header_From matching @\S*\buio.no deny has_header >> X-RBL-Warning deny size > 1MB hold size > 40k allow header_From >> in members hold * # default >> >> Of course, a big concern is whether implementing such a beast >> will make "filtering configuration" of Mailman lists too strange >> (or even obfuscated) for most list admins. > Personally, I don't think this has a place in Mailman. Why > reinvent the wheel? You can easily wrap an alias with a procmail > recipe that natively supports this in a language designed to > filter mail. It's the UNIX way: awk | sed | sort -rn, not piping > everything into sort and expecting it to do it all... :) The > exception, of course, is the wonderfully compact emacs suite. Much tho I like ACLs in list servers (I had a rather alrge collection of them when I ran petidomo), I largely agree. > Of course, a wrapper is much better suited to denying than > allowing message through -- to make it work, one would have to > allow everything in Mailman and expect the wrappers to handle it > all. However, you could have the procmail/maildrop/script filter > add an Approved: header if the messsage is indeed valid, which > Mailman would pick up on... Adding a single feature to Mailman would probably do the trick for everybody here: A command line switch to the wrapper script such that the mail arriving on stdin will be posted, no matter what any other configuration settings specify. Perhaps "post-approved" in addition to "post", "mailowner", "mailcmd" etc. Do *that*, and you can pretty well do anything at all in a procmail/maildrop/whatever pre-filter and get any desired behaviour out of it. -- J C Lawrence Internet: claw(a)kanga.nu ----------(*) Internet: coder(a)kanga.nu ...Honorary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] features I would like to see
by J C Lawrence 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:02:30 +0200 (CEST) Dan Ohnesorg <dan(a)feld.cvut.cz> wrote: > I have had big problem with glimpse on archiv with more than 64000 > messages. Glimpse does have publicly acknowledged scaling problems (tho I found them lower than that). > Now I use htdig and I find it better. You should look on it. I've not been well pleased with HTdig, either on features or performance. I'm becoming increasingly fond of UdmSearch tho. -- J C Lawrence Internet: claw(a)kanga.nu ----------(*) Internet: coder(a)kanga.nu ...Honorary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...

1 0

authentication failure revisited
by Joseph T. Bore 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

When ever I use my admin interface, I cant do anything because I'm continuously re-routed back to the login screen. after that my changes dont take. looking around on the devlopers archive I noticed the thread about "failed authentication." essentially from what I read, there was some weird interacatio between php, apache, mailman, and cookies. The solution apparently was to upgrade to more recent stuff. I have upgraded my installation to the most recent redhat packages for everything and still my interface doesnt seem to be getting the cookies. a quick print of os.eviron_get("HTTP_COOKIE"), yields "None" has anyone else run into this? I'm willing to help figure it out, but I dont know why the cookie isnt getting set and I'm getting lost quickly trying to follow it through all the code. (my first time looking at the mailman source) any hints? jb -- ------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- Joseph T. Bore | When you have tremendous conviction on a trade, you have jbore(a)TJTech.com | to go for the jugular. It takes courage to be a pig. ------------------+---------------------------------------------------------

2 2

Re: [Mailman-Developers] Change to acceptable_aliases
by Harald Meland 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

[Barry A. Warsaw] > >>>>> "HM" == Harald Meland <Harald.Meland(a)usit.uio.no> writes: > > HM> If we're going to complicate this interface further, why not > HM> go straight for some full-fledged ACL-like stuff? > > What do you have in mind? I think this has been discussed before, but put on back burner due at least partly because editing anything ACL-like with a web (non-Java etc.) interface seems cumbersome. I haven't had any brilliant ideas as to how that problem should be solved, but nevertheless I'm more and more inclined to implement something that would allow (clueful) admins to do things like: allow header_From matching @\S*\buio.no deny has_header X-RBL-Warning deny size > 1MB hold size > 40k allow header_From in members hold * # default As usual, the ACL is composed of rules, each consisting of an "action" and a "condition". The condition must be satisfied for the corresponding action to take place. The ACL is searched top-to-bottom for the first rule whose condition is true. If such a rule is found, the corresponding action is executed, and the search stops. Otherwise, the default action (which should be to "hold" the message, I guess) is executed. This would allow the filtering functionality to be configured in a very generic way with a single config option, albeit a rather complex one... [ The above ACL example is just something i jotted down off the top of my head -- I haven't given much thought to the syntax I have used, nor do I have any strong opinions about exactly which actions and conditions should exist. ] Of course, a big concern is whether implementing such a beast will make "filtering configuration" of Mailman lists too strange (or even obfuscated) for most list admins. It might be possible to construct some kind of mapping between the current config options and an ACL option, and make it possible for "inexperienced" users to continue using an interface similar to the one we have today (allowing Mailman to only consult the ACL whenever there's a need to decide which action should be taken for some message), but it sounds rather full of thorns... -- Harald

2 1

Re: [Mailman-Developers] features I would like to see
by Murray Jensen 26 Apr '00

26 Apr '00

>On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Murray Jensen wrote: >cool, i like that layout. could you send me your mhonarc frames config? I got it from the mhonarc examples directory in the 2.4.5 distribution: MHonArc2.4.5/examples/frames.mrc >how about using wilma, glimpse, and mhonarc, instead of webglimpse? >that is what i use. i sent some quick-start instructions to the >mailman-users list recently. Yes, I looked at wilma/glimpse, but webglimpse seemed easier (though I didn't try wilma, just scanned the doc quickly). Unfortunately, glimpse has the same restrictions as webglimpse - they come from the same people. Also, glimpse is a more generic indexing tool - something simpler just for these email-archive-on-the-web html files would do, plus it could be made smarter - only indexing the subject/body and maybe ignoring quoted text. The ideas behind glimpse could be used maybe. I don't really know, just tossing about ideas. Cheers! Murray... PS: I hope you don't mind me Cc'ing this to the list. It may help others. -- Murray Jensen, CSIRO Manufacturing Sci & Tech, Phone: +61 3 9662 7763 Locked Bag No. 9, Preston, Vic, 3072, Australia. Fax: +61 3 9662 7853 Internet: Murray.Jensen(a)cmst.csiro.au (old address was mjj(a)mlb.dmt.csiro.au)

2 1