woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) (03/29/86)
> Some sites do not get all > groups, and they incorrectly have the unsubscribed groups still present in > their active files. I have a question about this. When I recently dropped the 'soapbox' groups from our machine, several people complained that I should NOT remove them from our active file, because then that group name would be stripped from all articles passing through us. Since we are a backbone site feeding two other backbones that at the time DID get those groups, I didn't want to stop cross-postings to multiple groups, some of which we did and some of which we didn't get, from appearing in some of the groups to which they were originally posted on sites which DO receive those groups. Is this true or not? CAN I remove the dead (at hao) groups from the active file without harming other sites or not? --Greg -- {ucbvax!hplabs | decvax!noao | mcvax!seismo | ihnp4!seismo} !hao!woods CSNET: woods@ncar.csnet ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
frank@aaec.OZ (Frank Crawford) (04/04/86)
There is another point about dropping groups from the active file.
Doesn't the checkgroup message complain when a group is missing ('cause that
one of it's purposes)?
When you get to somewhere like Australia which doesn't get a lot
of the less useful groups then you wouldn't really be able to get any
reasonable output. I certainly don't want to try and pick which group I
really am missing from the hundreds that I can't get.
Frank Crawford
(frank@aaec.OZ)