[Mailman-Users] Can't admin pending messages -- me too

Jon Carnes jonc at nc.rr.com
Tue Feb 4 15:58:02 CET 2003

Let me point you to a posting from the archives from Vivek Khera:

   If you redirect a POST using mod_redirect, you lose 
   the data.  The workaround is to capture the POST
   data from the original request, convert it to a GET
   and redirect to that.  But then if you're sending
   the first request in the clear, what exactly do you
   gain by redirecting to SSL after all the info just
   went by cleartext?

   You need to fix it up so that the page is submitted
   *directly* to the SSL secured URL.

Since you moved thing around a bit, you may be using a simple redirect
to point Mailman admindb calls back to the address they used to use. 
During the redirect the POST information is lost.  The admindb cgi
receives no information. It looks like it's ignoring you.

HtH - Jon Carnes

On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 04:11, James Devenish wrote:
> Hi,
> Last month there was a thread about a problem that I am now having.
> Was a solution, or at least a cause, found?
> The problem, as stated by the original poster, is "It shows the pending
> messages with the choices - but if I select to approve, reject, or
> discard - nothing happens after I click submit. The same messages
> are still there and still pending."
> To clarify, this occurs in all parts of the admindb interface that
> are normally used. No approve/reject/discard/etc options have any
> effect. I just end up at the admindb page as though it was a
> daydream that I had used the buttons. There are no messages in
> any logs, there is no explanation or acknowledgment in the web
> interface.
> I have tried most regular things like stopping and starting daemons,
> clearing out temp junk (not that there was any), etc. Of course, there
> are posts pending. But, to complicate matters, the affected machine was
> physically relocated on the weekend and had its hard drives moved into a
> new chassis (with a new motherboard, etc) due to a long-standing
> hardware fault that we wanted to eliminate. And various other software
> was upgraded. On top of that, it has new IP addresses and its domain has
> changed. BUT this has not cause weird bugs in other software and most of
> changes were made in stages with no observed malfunctions along the way.
> All I can think is that the last time Mailman admindb was known to work
> was late last week, before these changes, and now it doesn't work. The
> version was 2.1b3 but in the face of this new problem, I upgraded to 2.1
> proper. The upgrade seems to have made no observable difference
> (improvement) in behaviour. Anyway, it sounds like the same problem
> that someone else had, even if my circumstances obscure this. OS is
> Solaris on UltraSPARC with Python 2.2.1. I will cheerfully upgrade
> this to Python 2.2.2 along with Python-dependent packages, in the
> near future.
> But, as for Mailman...
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Mailman-Users mailing list
> Mailman-Users at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
> Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
> Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/
> This message was sent to: jonc at nc.rr.com
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/jonc%40nc.rr.com

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list