RE: [Mailman-Developers] Min requirements for running Mailman?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5f081/5f081690d13cab683c28fbf6ed588e9aca0eff41" alt=""
Just to throw my tuppence worth in...
I've used mailman since Red Hat 7.2. I found that the version that came with Red Hat 9.0 wouldn't work for me (ie I couldn't upgrade to it) so I stuck with the 7.2 version (2.0.13) till the end of Red Hat 9 support.
We are now running the 2.1.5 version that comes with Fedora but running it on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). I did however have to recreate all the lists by hand in an overnight shift (what fun that was...) a few days before leaving the country (hence the rush). At that time I didn't know I could export the configuration (Doh!).
Red Hat have taken some packages out of RHEL eg arpwatch and mysql-server (although this is in the "extras" channel) even though these are in the source RPM. Mailman is currently not included but might be being put back in to RHEL 4.0. I would like to hope so, as I find 2.1.5 far superior to 2.0.13.
-- John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the Blind, Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU, Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey@rnib.org.uk
To truly believe in Evolution requires complete faith that life has no meaning. Fortunately there are billions of people who aren't that stupid.
-- DISCLAIMER:
NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it and any attachments from your system.
RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.
Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RNIB.
RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227
Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:31 -0400, John Dennis wrote:
Am I right in thinking that 2.1.5 does not have backward compatibility with 2.0.x versions, so it is not possible to directly upgrade a 2.0.x to 2.1.x?
I was certainly unable to take lists to 2.1.5 when I tried recently on full system upgrade - I ended up recreating the lists with significant pain involved.
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12379/12379ce99f5ac7f4b44fb18b20673926b1893b84" alt=""
At 3:48 PM +0100 2004-09-09, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
It takes a little more work, yes. See
<http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq04.032.htp>.
IIRC, that's basically one of the suggested methods.
-- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 17:20 +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
I think its rather worse than that against (at least) 2.1.5. Mailman refuses to touch any of the old list sets because they are missing certain required keys in the list data - related to topics from what I remember.
Someone with better python skills than I (probably the majority of people here) could have fixed up the list structure from the bit of code that exploded, but I found pretty much all the mailman tools just exploded when they saw the list data. I guess the upgrade code in versions.py can't handle that particular shift anymore.
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12379/12379ce99f5ac7f4b44fb18b20673926b1893b84" alt=""
At 4:37 PM +0100 2004-09-09, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
Hmm. To do the upgrade and let the automated tools handle most
things for you, might require upgrading from 2.0.x to an earlier 2.1.x version, and then to 2.1.5. Not pretty. ;(
-- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:48, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
It should be possible, but it's not something I've tested in a very long tim.e
Can you provide details? I consider it a bug that lists cannot be upgrade from 2.0.13 to 2.1.6. You might need to upgrade from 2.0.x where x < 13, to 2.0.13 first though.
-Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92078/920789fca9c5f85bcff835faa6ab7bec03f2f165" alt=""
Barry Warsaw wrote:
There have been reports on the mailman-users list of difficulties in moving/upgrading lists from older versions. After grappling with these issues in my own mind, I have concluded that the likely explanation is not that the new Mailman can't update the old list's config.db, but rather that the marshal format of the old lists config.db is not compatible with the Python on the new system.
Does this seem reasonable, or am I off track here.
-- Mark Sapiro <msapiro@value.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:54, Mark Sapiro wrote:
I think it's possible, but I'm not sure this is the real problem. OT1H, marshal is not guaranteed to be portable across Python versions (which is one reason we use pickle now). I searched through Python's NEWS and HISTORY files and while I did see a few changes to marshal mentioned, they aren't changes that I think would have affected Mailman's data files.
OTOH, it's possible that changes did occur that are biting us. However, I just tried to store a dictionary that contained just strings, floats, and ints. Created the file under Python 2.1.3 and read it back with Python 2.4.1 and had no problems. That doesn't necessarily mean we're safe, but it makes it less likely that this is the problem.
-Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:07 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:48, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
One of us is in a timewarp here....
This is 9 months ago... so my memory is not as good as it should be. However if I remember rightly it was down to features that were added during the 2.1.x series with a related change in database format.
You can do 2.0.13 -> 2.1.x where x <= 3 (from memory), but not direct to 2.1.5
[This is probably worth looking at because I see a significant number of sites still on 2.0.x unfortunately].
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 17:22, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
This is 9 months ago... so my memory is not as good as it should be.
The hazards of cleaning out a big inbox (on my part ;).
Okay, I'll see if I can try this.
[This is probably worth looking at because I see a significant number of sites still on 2.0.x unfortunately].
Yeah, it'll be that way forever.
Thanks, -Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 17:22, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
You can do 2.0.13 -> 2.1.x where x <= 3 (from memory), but not direct to 2.1.5
I did a simple upgrade from 2.0.14 to 2.1.6 and it went through just fine. However I only updated a single mailing list, so it's possible something broke with the other data file that get updated.
I search the open bugs for related issues and found SF bug #949117, which is now fixed in CVS. There are two other possible bugs still open that might be related #998384 and #1041791.
-Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:31 -0400, John Dennis wrote:
Am I right in thinking that 2.1.5 does not have backward compatibility with 2.0.x versions, so it is not possible to directly upgrade a 2.0.x to 2.1.x?
I was certainly unable to take lists to 2.1.5 when I tried recently on full system upgrade - I ended up recreating the lists with significant pain involved.
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12379/12379ce99f5ac7f4b44fb18b20673926b1893b84" alt=""
At 3:48 PM +0100 2004-09-09, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
It takes a little more work, yes. See
<http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq04.032.htp>.
IIRC, that's basically one of the suggested methods.
-- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 17:20 +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
I think its rather worse than that against (at least) 2.1.5. Mailman refuses to touch any of the old list sets because they are missing certain required keys in the list data - related to topics from what I remember.
Someone with better python skills than I (probably the majority of people here) could have fixed up the list structure from the bit of code that exploded, but I found pretty much all the mailman tools just exploded when they saw the list data. I guess the upgrade code in versions.py can't handle that particular shift anymore.
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12379/12379ce99f5ac7f4b44fb18b20673926b1893b84" alt=""
At 4:37 PM +0100 2004-09-09, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
Hmm. To do the upgrade and let the automated tools handle most
things for you, might require upgrading from 2.0.x to an earlier 2.1.x version, and then to 2.1.5. Not pretty. ;(
-- Brad Knowles, <brad@stop.mail-abuse.org>
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755
SAGE member since 1995. See <http://www.sage.org/> for more info.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:48, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
It should be possible, but it's not something I've tested in a very long tim.e
Can you provide details? I consider it a bug that lists cannot be upgrade from 2.0.13 to 2.1.6. You might need to upgrade from 2.0.x where x < 13, to 2.0.13 first though.
-Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/92078/920789fca9c5f85bcff835faa6ab7bec03f2f165" alt=""
Barry Warsaw wrote:
There have been reports on the mailman-users list of difficulties in moving/upgrading lists from older versions. After grappling with these issues in my own mind, I have concluded that the likely explanation is not that the new Mailman can't update the old list's config.db, but rather that the marshal format of the old lists config.db is not compatible with the Python on the new system.
Does this seem reasonable, or am I off track here.
-- Mark Sapiro <msapiro@value.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:54, Mark Sapiro wrote:
I think it's possible, but I'm not sure this is the real problem. OT1H, marshal is not guaranteed to be portable across Python versions (which is one reason we use pickle now). I searched through Python's NEWS and HISTORY files and while I did see a few changes to marshal mentioned, they aren't changes that I think would have affected Mailman's data files.
OTOH, it's possible that changes did occur that are biting us. However, I just tried to store a dictionary that contained just strings, floats, and ints. Created the file under Python 2.1.3 and read it back with Python 2.4.1 and had no problems. That doesn't necessarily mean we're safe, but it makes it less likely that this is the problem.
-Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac49/fac49c144304b996fdd64e4a68185056eae4996a" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 16:07 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Thu, 2004-09-09 at 10:48, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
One of us is in a timewarp here....
This is 9 months ago... so my memory is not as good as it should be. However if I remember rightly it was down to features that were added during the 2.1.x series with a related change in database format.
You can do 2.0.13 -> 2.1.x where x <= 3 (from memory), but not direct to 2.1.5
[This is probably worth looking at because I see a significant number of sites still on 2.0.x unfortunately].
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 17:22, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
This is 9 months ago... so my memory is not as good as it should be.
The hazards of cleaning out a big inbox (on my part ;).
Okay, I'll see if I can try this.
[This is probably worth looking at because I see a significant number of sites still on 2.0.x unfortunately].
Yeah, it'll be that way forever.
Thanks, -Barry
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/50535/5053512c679a1bec3b1143c853c1feacdabaee83" alt=""
On Mon, 2005-05-30 at 17:22, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
You can do 2.0.13 -> 2.1.x where x <= 3 (from memory), but not direct to 2.1.5
I did a simple upgrade from 2.0.14 to 2.1.6 and it went through just fine. However I only updated a single mailing list, so it's possible something broke with the other data file that get updated.
I search the open bugs for related issues and found SF bug #949117, which is now fixed in CVS. There are two other possible bugs still open that might be related #998384 and #1041791.
-Barry
participants (6)
-
Barry Warsaw
-
Brad Knowles
-
John Dennis
-
John.Airey@rnib.org.uk
-
Mark Sapiro
-
Nigel Metheringham