rick@uunet.UU.NET (Rick Adams) (10/18/89)
The initial results from the version control message are fascinating. So far, 4,111 systems have responded. The big surprise: 112 VMS machines responded. 268 Cnews sites have responded. Bnews partial stats (2.9 is the oldest version to support the version control message): 2.9 4 (6/26/82) 2.10.1 8 (6/24/83) 2.10.2 22 (9/12/84) 2.10.3 71 (6/6/85) Details and more information when the returns stop coming in. ---rick
chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) (10/18/89)
> 2.9 4 (6/26/82)
There are still sites that are running seven year old software that hasn't
broken. eek....
--
Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA
chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking]
Anyone who thinks that the argument over {sci,rec}.fishies is about
group names doesn't understand the system.karl@cheops.cis.ohio-state.edu (Karl Kleinpaste) (10/18/89)
chuq@Apple.COM writes: > 2.9 4 (6/26/82) There are still sites that are running seven year old software that hasn't broken. eek.... That made me gulp, too. How do they deal with moderated newsgroups? (I suppose they don't, of course.) What do they do without net.general around, since it was special-cased with net.followup? The questions raised by 2.9 still being out there are somehow depressing. --Karl
chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) (10/18/89)
> > 2.9 4 (6/26/82) > There are still sites that are running seven year old software that hasn't > broken. eek.... >That made me gulp, too. How do they deal with moderated newsgroups? >(I suppose they don't, of course.) What do they do without >net.general around, since it was special-cased with net.followup? The >questions raised by 2.9 still being out there are somehow depressing. What I want to know is what happens to those systems when all those files end up in a *single* directory, since 2.9 didn't have the tree structure in /usr/spool/news..... -- Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking] Anyone who thinks that the argument over {sci,rec}.fishies is about group names doesn't understand the system.
david@indetech.com (David Kuder) (10/19/89)
>> 2.9 4 (6/26/82) > >There are still sites that are running seven year old software that hasn't >broken. eek.... So, what can we do to bring these folks into the modern world? Also, is there any way to deduce who might be running software so old or so odd that it doesn't support the version message? Is it time to establish a known group of volunteers to help the news impaired? There is good news in Rick's numbers. If I'm reading them correctly out of some 4000 sites that have responded, only some 100 are running software as old as or older than 2.10.3. That translates to 97% of the folks are running news software that's less than 5 years old. -- David A. Kuder Comp.lang.perl, the time is now! 415 438-2003 david@indetech.com {uunet,sun,sharkey,pacbell}!indetech!david
dww@stl.stc.co.uk (David Wright) (10/21/89)
In article <35750@apple.Apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
#> > 2.9 4 (6/26/82)
#> There are still sites that are running seven year old software that hasn't
#> broken. eek....
#
#What I want to know is what happens to those systems when all those files
#end up in a *single* directory, since 2.9 didn't have the tree structure in
#/usr/spool/news.....
Perhaps Rick could ask them - presumably he has the addresses?
I think many of us would be interested to hear how people cope with such old
software on the current net.
Regards, "None shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity"
David Wright STL, London Road, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK
dww@stl.stc.co.uk <or> ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dww <or> PSI%234237100122::DWW