bbh@whizz.uucp (Bud Hovell) (07/14/89)
In article <970@rush.cts.com> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes: >In article <694@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: >>Yes - 'rn' seems to have a problem here. The site name aortuars in the Xrefs >>line, but still doesn't mark cross-postings as read. Any gurus out there who > >Why don`t I have a probelm with this? I never read something twice. I will Lemme understand this - you want to know why you *don't* have this problem? I never have asserted that you (or anyone else) had it or ought to have it. And certainly cannot account for why you do not. :-) >admit that one single article which is cross-posted will show up as something >like "1 article in unix-pc.general, 1 article in comp.sys.att" but when I go >to read them, I *never* see it twice. Is the current problem just that you`re >bothered by being told that you`ve got one more article that you should be? No - the SAME ARTICLE appears in full in, say, unix-pc.whatever, then later aortuars AGAIN in full in, say, comp.sys.att. And, yes, the Xrefs line has the site name in it, and news was compiled with DOXREFS. Everything else seems to function fine. Obviously, we are doing something wrong here locally. Once everything gets back to normal (we have been up and down for the past three days with hard- ware problems, now fixed), we'll go back and recompile 'rn', as Lenny suggests. Bud Hovell USENET: ...!{sun!nosun|tektronix!percival}!whizz!{bbh|postmaster|sysadmin} USPO: McCormick & Hovell, Inc., PO Box 1812, Lake Oswego, OR USA 97035 MOTD: "Vote NO!
jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald) (07/17/89)
In article <698@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: > [...] > >No - the SAME ARTICLE appears in full in, say, unix-pc.whatever, then later >aortuars AGAIN in full in, say, comp.sys.att. And, yes, the Xrefs line has the >site name in it, and news was compiled with DOXREFS. Everything else seems to >function fine. > >Obviously, we are doing something wrong here locally. Once everything gets >back to normal (we have been up and down for the past three days with hard- >ware problems, now fixed), we'll go back and recompile 'rn', as Lenny suggests. > > Bud Hovell It might not be rn - it isn't for us. Check whether you have any loops in your news feeds (this is easy for me to say :-). We are getting reruns in our incoming feeds, with a long enough time delay that we may have already deleted copy from the previous time around the loop. (In fact, that was what inspired Greg to post his original silly message.) Part of the problem is that our C news is expiring the history at the same time as the articles (I think that this is happening because we're still using an alpha/beta release of C news, I don't think that the posted release acts this way, and we're gonna install the official release Real Soon Now...). -- "Software and cathedrals are much the same - | John Macdonald first we build them, then we pray" (Sam Redwine) | jmm@eci386
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (07/17/89)
In article <698@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: > In article <970@rush.cts.com> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes: > >In article <694@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: > > >Yes - 'rn' seems to have a problem here. The site name aortuars in the Xrefs > > >line, but still doesn't mark cross-postings as read. Any gurus out there who > > > >Why don`t I have a probelm with this? I never read something twice. I will > > >admit that one single article which is cross-posted will show up as something > >like "1 article in unix-pc.general, 1 article in comp.sys.att" but when I go > >to read them, I *never* see it twice. Is the current problem just that you`re > >bothered by being told that you`ve got one more article that you should be? No, that's not the problem. I, however, do have a related problem to this cross-posting nonsense. Though I had been confused with Xref's in the beginning, my real reason still remains. I do not read the unix-pc.all groups unless I'm really bored (and yes, I do have interest in Unix PC's). However, with all this cross- posting, I have to put up with it in comp.sys.att anyway. Not to mention the fact that it's all jumbled up with many of the unix-pc groups _all_ being coss-posted to comp.sys.att. I think those people who are trying to be do-gooder's and increase the circulation of their postings should think a bit more about the consequences. This gratuitous jumble in comp.sys.att is much to difficult to read anyway. -- 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
bbh@whizz.uucp (Bud Hovell) (07/19/89)
In article <1989Jul17.145902.3406@eci386.uucp> jmm@eci386.UUCP (John Macdonald) writes: >In article <698@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: >>Obviously, we are doing something wrong here locally. Once everything gets >>back to normal (we have been up and down for the past three days with hard- >>ware problems, now fixed), we'll go back and recompile 'rn', as Lenny suggests. >It might not be rn - it isn't for us. Check whether you have any loops in >your news feeds (this is easy for me to say :-). We are getting reruns in We have a couple of local groups here. If I cross-post from one to the other, the problem immediately shows up there as well. Very consistent - no known exceptions to this behavior in any groups cross-posted. We *did* recompile news (with DOXREFS) and 'rn' - with no change. Someone else (using an HP 9000, if memory serves me) just reported the same problem from another site. Gremlins? :-) Bud Hovell USENET: ...!{sun!nosun|tektronix!percival}!whizz!{bbh|postmaster|sysadmin} USPO: McCormick & Hovell, Inc., PO Box 1812, Lake Oswego, OR USA 97035 MOTD: "Vote NO!"
mdapoz@hybrid.UUCP (Mark Dapoz) (07/20/89)
In article <709@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: >We *did* recompile news (with DOXREFS) and 'rn' - with no change. Someone >else (using an HP 9000, if memory serves me) just reported the same problem >from another site. Gremlins? :-) I found that I had to define both DOXREFS *and* NORELAY to get rn to handle the Xref: line properly. Defining just DOXREFS wasn't good enough 'cause rn tried to determine the local host using the Relay-Version: line which didn't exist on my machine. Since it wasn't there, rn just gave my system a null name which it then tried to match to the Xref: line, and since it didn't, it just ignored the Xref. -- Mark Dapoz (mdapoz@hybrid.UUCP) ...uunet!{mnetor,dptcdc}!hybrid!mdapoz I remind you that humans are only a tiny minority in this galaxy. -- Spock, "The Apple," stardate 3715.6.
clewis@eci386.uucp (Chris Lewis) (07/20/89)
In article <698@whizz.uucp> bbh@whizz.UUCP (Bud Hovell) writes: Hi Bud! >No - the SAME ARTICLE appears in full in, say, unix-pc.whatever, then later >aortuars AGAIN in full in, say, comp.sys.att. And, yes, the Xrefs line has the >site name in it, and news was compiled with DOXREFS. Everything else seems to >function fine. If you only have the site name in the Xrefs: line, then News' (B-news right?) DOXREFS mechanism isn't working. It's supposed to look like: Xrefs: yoursitename newsgroup:number newsgroup:number .... It's been a while since I "Configure"'d rn, but I believe that rn *can* choose to disable recognizing/interpreting Xrefs lines. A reconfigure is definately warranted. What version of news are you running? More than one of the versions (or patch levels) of B-news was busted w.r.t. Xrefs. A little history may be in order - when rn first appeared, Larry felt that he had to implement some sort of Xrefs facility into news articles so that rn could avoid seeing the same article again. I think that he originally supplied the patches for news, but ultimately this got folded into Rick Adam's distributions of news. However, at least one of the versions/patches since then broke it. There was quite a bit of argument about it at the time, for there are other ways to figure this out - readnews does something along the lines of remembering the inode number (I think - don't quote me, it's been a LOOONGGG time since I played with 2.10.1 and readnews). Some caveats to keep in mind: - Xrefs works approximately this way - when you "n" or "j" or whatever an article, ALL of the "newsgroup:number" lines are, in effect, merged into the .newsrc entries. Thus, you shouldn't see any of the xrefs again. - However, if you mark an xref'd article "unread" (eg: "M") in one group, and then go thru the other group it's in, you'll see it again. Which is a bit of a pain. I sort of wish that if you mark a xref'd group "unread", that it cancels all other occurances in the xref anyways. Insignificant bitch about a pretty spectacular program. - Xref's are *not* remembered across rn sessions. - Xrefs won't work if the sitename is wrong. Eg: might be some other site's Xref line that came in by mistake, and the newsgroup:number fields would be totally wrong. One thing that might trip up some machines is whether the site name has more than 6 characters - news and rn may be getting different ideas as to what the site name is. Maybe domains could screw this up sometimes. - Xrefs won't work if the Newsgroups: line doesn't have any commas in it. (I've been noticing the occasional *known* cross-posting appearing with only one newsgroup in the Newsgroups: line. This appears to be *someone* stripping newsgroups from the Newsgroups: line if somewhere along the routing, one of the sites doesn't receive some of the newsgroups - this is VERY BAD BEHAVIOUR - but I can't pin it down yet, even so, this has no bearing on what we're talking about because it wouldn't be cross-posted on your machine anyhow...) -- Chris Lewis, R.H. Lathwell & Associates: Elegant Communications Inc. UUCP: {uunet!mnetor, utcsri!utzoo}!lsuc!eci386!clewis Phone: (416)-595-5425