woods@eci386.UUCP (07/07/89)
In article <240@gnosys.UUCP> gst@gnosys.UUCP (Gary S. Trujillo) writes: > In article <674@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes > (not necessarily in the following order): > > Over the past several months, I've become increasingly aware of the huge > > percentage of articles which cross-post between comp.sys.att and unix-pc.*. > > When I get into comp.sys.att (second in order in my .newsrc), I find > > myself virtually wearing out the 'n' key... > > Well, I don't think cross-posting is inherently a bad thing, since (at least > under UNIX implementations of the network news software) cross-postings are > implemented by means of links, so no extra disk space is utilized. The > benefits of cross-postings include the fact that they can achieve a wider > distribution for certain articles whose subject matter straddle the categ- > ories defined by existing newsgroups. That's not the point! Since rn doesn't go get the message id's for the articles you have read when it starts, assuming it could, you can easily end up re-reading things if you don't have the luxury of being able to leave one rn running for the entire day. I often read groups several at a time, then do other things. Rn simply cannot do Xref matching when you start and stop it between groups, and I don't think it should either! I don't see how wider distribution of unix-pc stuff will help, when most of those who are interested already get the unix-pc groups, and those who don't should. It only serves to over-clutter comp.sys.att with a real mess of stuff which most comp.sys.att only readers don't want to see. (I read both groups!) Cross-posting *_IS_* inherently bad when it clutters up other groups. That's why we have groups in the first place. Perhaps unix-pc.general should be renamed comp.sys.att.unix-pc, but remain on the "alternate newsgroups" list. This might help prevent some of the useless clutter. PLEASE do not cross-post Unix PC related articles to comp.sys.att! -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft,gpu.utcs.UToronto.CA,utorgpu.BITNET} +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] Toronto, Ontario CANADA
levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) (07/08/89)
In article <1989Jul7.052540.7258@eci386.uucp> woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes: | |That's not the point! Since rn doesn't go get the message id's |for the articles you have read when it starts, assuming it could, |you can easily end up re-reading things if you don't have the |luxury of being able to leave one rn running for the entire day. |I often read groups several at a time, then do other things. Rn |simply cannot do Xref matching when you start and stop it between |groups, and I don't think it should either! The version of rn I use does better than that. For each article read, and for each Xref matched, it updates my .newsrc for the xref-ed newsgroups. When I get to those groups, the already seen articles don't show up -- and this lasts over quitting and restarting rn. It even marks articles in unsubscribed newsgroups, so if I resubscribe I still don't see them again. Sample .newsrc line-- misc.consumers! 1-16426,16524,16532,16539,16613,16628,16631,16642,16646,16663,16669,16679,16687,16696 Three exceptions to this eminently useful feature: The c[atch-up] command does not affect .newsrc, so articles passed in this way can yet be seen. A slower alternative which does get rid of the articles in all their incarnations is "/^/j". The #*@&!'s who post articles individually to N newsgroups. Of course, no Xref is generated, so I can't avoid seeing the articles multiple times. Subscribing to a new group: All articles are unread -- rn doesn't try to go back and see what may have been previously seen. I think we are running rn 2.11. /JBL = UUCP: levin@bbn.com (new) or {backbone}!bbn!levin (old) INTERNET: levin@bbn.com POTS: (617) 873-3463 "Earn more sessions by sleeving."
levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) (07/08/89)
In article <42398@bbn.COM> levin@BBN.COM I screwed up: |I think we are running rn 2.11. Actually, the 'v' commands gives @(#)$Header: rn.c,v 4.3.1.4 85/09/10 11:05:13 lwall Exp $ = UUCP: levin@bbn.com (new) or {backbone}!bbn!levin (old) INTERNET: levin@bbn.com POTS: (617) 873-3463 "Earn more sessions by sleeving."
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (07/09/89)
In article:
Subject: Re: Too much cross-posting?
Message-ID: <1989Jul7.052540.7258@eci386.uucp>
by:
woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
He states:
" I don't see how wider distribution of unix-pc stuff will help, when
most of those who are interested already get the unix-pc groups, and
those who don't should. It only serves to over-clutter comp.sys.att
with a real mess of stuff which most comp.sys.att only readers don't
want to see. (I read both groups!) Cross-posting *_IS_* inherently
bad when it clutters up other groups. That's why we have groups in
the first place.
Perhaps unix-pc.general should be renamed comp.sys.att.unix-pc, but
remain on the "alternate newsgroups" list. This might help prevent
some of the useless clutter.
PLEASE do not cross-post Unix PC related articles to comp.sys.att!
"
Bushwa! I'll say it again: BUSHWA!
From a cursory examination of the comp.sys.att articles arriving here at
PORTAL, it's clear that about 50% are related to the UNIXPC/3B1/7300, and
the remaining 50% are divided between the 6300/6310/6312/6386 and the other
3B2 systems.
Private email I've received clearly indicates that MOST of the people who
NEED to receive the unix-pc.* groups are not receiving them, and they're
extremely thankful FOR the cross-postings to comp.sys.att from unix-pc.*
Three cases in point:
1) the WD2010 chip group buy I'm organizing. 85% of the responses arrived
from people who ONLY saw it on comp.sys.att
2) Most (if not all) of Europe is NOT receiving unix-pc.*; my contact in
Brussels writes that his receipt of unix-pc material is ONLY via the
comp.sys.att newsgroup (ref. Jim Sanchez at Sytek).
3) Clearly 90% of the "Thanks!" email I received for my recent posting of the
new s4diag UNIXPC diagnostics came from people who ONLY could get it from
comp.sys.att.
The volume of postings to BOTH comp.sys.att and the unix-pc.* groups do NOT
warrant further discussion of restriction/polarization/etc; there simply
aren't that many articles. I can store more than an average weeks' worth of
postings to both groups on a single 5-1/4" floppy (400Kbytes).
I personally prefer that all UNIXPC-related material be only in the unix-pc.*
newsgroups, but the reality of the situation shows that MANY users would
unduly suffer (by being left out) if we followed Greg A. Woods' suggestion.
*MY* suggestion is that ALL unix-pc.* material be cross-posted to comp.sys.att
and for people to fix their brain-damaged mail readers. Worst case is for
someone to simply type an "n"; are the lazy readers out there THAT calorie
conscious re: burning 1/2 calorie moving one's index finger? :-) Sheesh,
are people that unable to cope with the vagaries of Usenet? We're NOT talking
about cretin-JJ "Puh-LEEZE HELP ME!" postings; we're talking about postings
and responses from people who have legitimate questions, concerns and answers
about their computing investment.
Lest we forget: the UNIXPC *IS* an AT&T product. Activity surrounding the
UNIXPC has been growing by leaps and bounds during the past 18 months, far
more so than with the 6300 family. As an elected officer of the Northern
California AT&T Computer Users' Group, I *SEE* the evidence.
The comp.sys.att newsgroup is for the benefit of ALL users/owners/operators
of AT&T equipment, and the evidence I've seen is that over 85% of the UNIXPC
owners/users are unable to receive the unix-pc.* newsgroups. And for those
who don't know, there are four: unix-pc.general, unix-pc.sources, unix-pc.uucp,
and unix-pc.bugs.
Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]bob@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) (07/10/89)
In article <20239@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes:
...over 85% of the UNIXPC owners/users are unable to receive the
unix-pc.* newsgroups.
Bushwa! They may be unwilling, but they're certainly not unable.
Anyone who would like a unix-pc feed can have one for the asking.
Drop me a line.dklann@heurikon.UUCP (David Klann) (07/10/89)
In article <20239@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: >Bushwa! I'll say it again: BUSHWA! > >Lest we forget: the UNIXPC *IS* an AT&T product. Activity surrounding the >UNIXPC has been growing by leaps and bounds during the past 18 months, far >more so than with the 6300 family. As an elected officer of the Northern >California AT&T Computer Users' Group, I *SEE* the evidence. > >Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ] Thad pretty well summed up my feelings about this issue. Those of us with small disks (e.g. 20MB) cannot afford the luxury of having News resident. I get the chance to read unix-pc.* about twice a month. If the unix-pc stuff was not posted to comp.sys.att I (and many others) would really be in the dark! Speaking of which... Here's a call for help! Has anyone gotten a unix-pc to come up in single user mode WITH windows? Below is a list of the things I've done to my initialization files/scripts: + set initdefault to "s" in /etc/inittab: is:s:initdefault + converted /etc/inittab and rc to the System V.[23] style; that is, there's an rc2 script and an rc2.d directory, an rc0 script, and an rc0.d directory, etc. (The system no longer uses /etc/rc.), + removed the shutdown stuff from /etc/profile, + added a "sysinit" line to /etc/inittab that calls a script named /etc/loadwind. /etc/loadwind loads the window driver, the keyboard driver (thanks Ford!), and the IPC driver. The system boots, loads the drivers, the screen gets filled with little green dots as normal, it displays the "% disk free" message (from /etc/profile), sets up my SU prompt (from /.profile), and then ... NOTHING! I know it's in single user mode, but I can't access the system at all. It's as if stdin has been disconnected somewhere. If anyone can help I sure would appreciate it. I spent most of the (99 degree!) afternoon yesterday playing with this! I'm really stumped. When I get this all working, I'll post a detailed description of it to the Net (comp.sys.att). David Klann Heurikon Corporation 608-271-8700 {backbone}!uwvax!heurikon!dklann
kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz) (07/17/89)
In article <20239@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: >And for those who don't know, there are four: >unix-pc.general, unix-pc.sources, unix-pc.uucp, and unix-pc.bugs. You missed two. From ditka's active file: unix-pc.bugs 00118 00115 y unix-pc.general 03700 03629 y ** unix-pc.misc 00002 00002 y unix-pc.sources 00374 00368 y ** unix-pc.test 00060 00058 y unix-pc.uucp 00140 00139 y Obviously not much traffic in unix-pc.misc; seems more than a bit redundant given unix-pc.general. And to add to the list of available feeds, anybody who wishes to call either of my machines (Chicago and New Mexico) is welcome to a get unix-pc (and most anything else) from me. The New Mexico site, ditka, has a TrailBlazer, while the Chicago site, royko, is limited to 2400 baud but is PC Pursuitable. -- Karl Swartz |UUCP uunet!lll-winken!ames!hc!rt1!ditka!kls 1-505/667-7777 (work) |Internet kls@rt1.lanl.gov 1-505/672-3113 (home) |BIX kswartz "I never let my schooling get in the way of my education." (Twain)
nichiren@glyph.UUCP (Andy Heffernan) (07/18/89)
In article <2796@ditka.UUCP> kls@ditka.UUCP (Karl Swartz) writes: >In article <20239@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: >>And for those who don't know, there are four: >>unix-pc.general, unix-pc.sources, unix-pc.uucp, and unix-pc.bugs. > >You missed two. From ditka's active file: > > unix-pc.bugs 00118 00115 y > unix-pc.general 03700 03629 y >** unix-pc.misc 00002 00002 y > unix-pc.sources 00374 00368 y >** unix-pc.test 00060 00058 y > unix-pc.uucp 00140 00139 y > >Obviously not much traffic in unix-pc.misc; seems more than a bit >redundant given unix-pc.general. For what its worth, uunet doesn't carry unix-pc.misc: $ grep unix-pc /usr/lib/news/newsgroups unix-pc.bugs Bug reports, fixes & workarounds. unix-pc.general General information and discussion. unix-pc.sources Source code to various programs. unix-pc.test Test group. unix-pc.uucp Configuration and management of uucp on Unix-PCs. I snarfed their newsgroups file about a week and a half ago (and killed the /usr/lib/news/checkgroups script in the process), so it appears to be a reasonably up-to-date list. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andy Heffernan uunet!glyph!nichiren [1222 - 1282] -------------------------------------------------------------------------