news@fnx.UUCP (News Administrator) (06/06/91)
In article <244y314w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: >As I have mentioned several times, I did all of this. The software I was >using was perfectly OK according to every test I was able to do from here. I >didn't get any error reports, I didn't notice anything untoward. Postings to >misc.test using the 'bad' software worked -- I got responses. So, I have an idea. Why doesn't someone cobble up a test suite using the appropriate pieces of Cnews code? A site could then run the test suite on a sample article to see if some site down the line would dump it on the floor. This way Henry, et al. don't have to do inelegant things to their software, and anybody that cares if their articles get out to the world have a way to check their software.
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) (06/06/91)
news@fnx.UUCP (News Administrator) writes: > So, I have an idea. Why doesn't someone cobble up a test suite using the > appropriate pieces of Cnews code? A site could then run the test suite > on a sample article to see if some site down the line would dump it on the > floor. That helps a bit, but it isn't really the whole solution. There's no guarantee that the sample article will exhibit the error in question. For example, if you are using rn and one of your users is in the habit of leaving out the spaces after the colons in a newsgroup header, then all his postings will be silently dropped, but your sample article will pass the test suite with no problems. One could use the test suite to check every article leaving the site, but that may be difficult depending upon the software being used. Also note that making the test suite sufficiently portable will be quite a challenge. Issuing error reports is a more robust solution, and probably less effort because you only have to make the code as portable as C News. mathew
cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) (06/10/91)
In article <HPN532w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: >For example, if you are using rn and one of your users is in the habit of >leaving out the spaces after the colons in a newsgroup header, then all his >postings will be silently dropped, but your sample article will pass the >test suite with no problems. The issue here is user education and/or fixes to Pnews. -- \/ato /'\ /`\ Ian Dickinson TED KALDIS FOR PRESIDENT! /^^^\/^^^\ vato@warwick.ac.uk /TWIN/TEATS\ @c=GB@o=University of Warwick@ou=Computing Services@cn=Ian Dickinson / \
jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) (06/11/91)
In article <+F7_3++@warwick.ac.uk>, cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes: |> In article <HPN532w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: |> >For example, if you are using rn and one of your users is in the habit of |> >leaving out the spaces after the colons in a newsgroup header, then all his |> >postings will be silently dropped, but your sample article will pass the |> >test suite with no problems. |> |> The issue here is user education and/or fixes to Pnews. Since Pnews is a script, it is trivial to make the following simple modification to it: instead of feeding the article to inews directly, it feeds it to a simple checking/repair program instead. This program checks all headers for validity, and fixes up common errors that can be repaired (e.g. putting back the space if someone says "Keywords:foo" in a header. If a header cannot be repaired, it returns a false status; if everything is valid after fixups, it feeds the article to inews. The code to do the checking can be taken directly from C news, since Henry and Geoff have already taken the trouble to write it. Fixing your Pnews will then become a one-liner; just change the definition of the "inews" shell variable to point to the new program. For NNTP users, we can do even better: change the mini-inews program to do the checks before talking to the NNTP server. Then Pnews need not be changed at all. -- Joe Buck jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu {uunet,ucbvax}!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) (06/11/91)
cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes: > In article <HPN532w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *H > >For example, if you are using rn and one of your users is in the habit of > >leaving out the spaces after the colons in a newsgroup header, then all his > >postings will be silently dropped, but your sample article will pass the > >test suite with no problems. > > The issue here is user education and/or fixes to Pnews. And then what happens when the next piece of similar software comes along? Even if you can get all existing net software fixed to be perfect at detecting errors before sending out articles -- which you can't -- that isn't going to help people running new software. mathew
rsalz@bbn.com (Rich Salz) (06/12/91)
In <1991Jun10.182410.2731@agate.berkeley.edu> jbuck@forney.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) writes: >For NNTP users, we can do even better: change the mini-inews program to do >the checks before talking to the NNTP server. Then Pnews need not be changed >at all. I have an inews that fully verifies all headers. It uses the NNTP LIST and HEAD commands to verify newsgroup, moderation status, "can you cancel this?" and so on. It will be ready for public release in the fall. /r$ -- Please send comp.sources.unix-related mail to rsalz@uunet.uu.net. Use a domain-based address or give alternate paths, or you may lose out.
cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) (06/14/91)
In article <9oND43w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: >cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes: >> The issue here is user education and/or fixes to Pnews. >And then what happens when the next piece of similar software comes along? >Even if you can get all existing net software fixed to be perfect at >detecting errors before sending out articles -- which you can't -- that isn't >going to help people running new software. But why would anybody release NEW software that didn't follow the RFCs? -- \/ato /'\ /`\ Ian Dickinson TED KALDIS FOR PRESIDENT! /^^^\/^^^\ vato@warwick.ac.uk /TWIN/TEATS\ @c=GB@o=University of Warwick@ou=Computing Services@cn=Ian Dickinson / \
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) (06/17/91)
cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes: > In article <9oND43w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *H > >Even if you can get all existing net software fixed to be perfect at > >detecting errors before sending out articles -- which you can't -- that isn' > >going to help people running new software. > > But why would anybody release NEW software that didn't follow the RFCs? Why don't you ask in news.software.anu-news? I know it must be hard for you to understand, but sometimes when people write software in their own spare time and release it for free, they don't spend long enough testing it to remove every single bug. mathew
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (06/18/91)
In article <BXwo41w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: >I know it must be hard for you to understand, but sometimes when people write >software in their own spare time and release it for free, they don't spend >long enough testing it to remove every single bug. Time to stop the debate. We have come full circle. As I recall, this is a paraphrase of one the early comments to Mathew, telling him his criticism of C news was unreasonable. Now we see Mathew, while continuing to criticize C news, adopting the same argument to defend his news software against the backlash criticism it is receiving for generating bad articles in the first place. The more things change, the more they stay the same. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
billd@fps.com (Bill Davidson) (06/19/91)
In article <BXwo41w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: [on broken posting software -> anu-news] >I know it must be hard for you to understand, but sometimes when people write >software in their own spare time and release it for free, they don't spend >long enough testing it to remove every single bug. So why should the vast majority of the net suffer for a very small minority that's running bug infested software? --Bill Davidson
alan@ukpoit.co.uk (Alan Barclay) (06/19/91)
In article <1XS{4|-@warwick.ac.uk> cudep@warwick.ac.uk (Ian Dickinson) writes: >In article <9oND43w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) writes: >>And then what happens when the next piece of similar software comes along? > >But why would anybody release NEW software that didn't follow the RFCs? > BUGS! You might not want to release NEW software that doesn't follow the RFCs but sooner or later someone is bound to make a mistake. -- Alan Barclay iT | E-mail : alan@ukpoit.uucp Barker Lane | BANG-STYLE : .....!ukc!ukpoit!alan CHESTERFIELD S40 1DY | VOICE : +44 246 214241
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) (06/19/91)
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes: > In article <BXwo41w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *H > >I know it must be hard for you to understand, but sometimes when people writ > >software in their own spare time and release it for free, they don't spend > >long enough testing it to remove every single bug. > > Time to stop the debate. We have come full circle. As I recall, this > is a paraphrase of one the early comments to Mathew, telling him his > criticism of C news was unreasonable. Now we see Mathew, while continuing > to criticize C news, adopting the same argument to defend his news software > against the backlash criticism it is receiving for generating bad articles > in the first place. For the nth time: I AM NOT DEFENDING FAULTY SOFTWARE. I AM MERELY RECOGNIZING THAT IT EXISTS AND WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST. I don't expect C News to be bugless. However, I also do not expect it to rely on all other posting software being faultless -- which it seems to at the moment. mathew
mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*) (06/19/91)
billd@fps.com (Bill Davidson) writes: > In article <BXwo41w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *H > [on broken posting software -> anu-news] > >I know it must be hard for you to understand, but sometimes when people writ > >software in their own spare time and release it for free, they don't spend > >long enough testing it to remove every single bug. > > So why should the vast majority of the net suffer for a very small > minority that's running bug infested software? Because all we're asking you to do is propogate errors via a Usenet newsgroup. That's hardly a terrible imposition to suffer, and it will (a) help to track down buggy software and fix it, (b) help as a means of reporting problems such as dodgy gateways and huge articles, and (c) prevent users stuck with bad software from being victimised unfairly. mathew