From: Paul Tansom
** Keith Watson keith.watson@kewill.com [2003-05-28 09:53]:
From: Paul Tansom
Not actually booted my CD and tried it, but apparently yes parted is on Knoppix apparently (can't find the link I found the quote on, but it was from Knoppix 3.2 onwards). Some other useful links you may be interested in:
[snip]
Thanks for the excellent links Paul, especially the one for PartImage.
** end quote [Keith Watson]
No problem. It happens to be something I'm looking into myself, partly for speeding up the install process for machine (Windows 98 primarily unfortunately), and partly to recover some data on a couple of drives I'm having problems with.
One seems to have a duff sector which is preventing access to a partition (Fujitsu 20G, newest drive I had until I bought a replacement, but not one of the notorious ones), and the other (again a Fujitsu, but 13G this time) which seems to have lost partition information on the transfer to another machine.
I'm trying to work out whether Parted will recover things for me, or whether I'm better off to go with one of two commercial solutions I've found:
Acronis RecoverExpert - looks good because it supports Linux Ext2, Ext3, ReiserFS, and Linux Swap as well as the traditional Windows formats, but the demo is only the Windows GUI version (not the boot disk). This has a few issues booting with the drive 13G drive connected (so I can't get any idea of whether it will recover it) and with the 20G it just shows the partition as duff (it seems as though it simply recovers lost partitions rather than fixing corrupt ones).
Active Partition Recovery - only supports FAT and NTFS partitions, but the boot disk can see and read all the partitions in question and show me the data, so it has a distinct attraction in that respect!
Both about 30usd - if anyone has used either of these, or Parted or another utility to recover a partition problem I'd be interested to hear.
Oh, my tape backup is giving me hassle too - I'm not a happy penguin at the moment. Having said that, my Linux machines are going strong and it is only my Windows 2000 that is givin me hassle (duff hardware and the tape backups which verified fine are not allowing me to access them now that I've lost the boot drive that they were created from - classic backup!).
-- Paul Tansom: - contact paul@aptanet.com for more information Internet and Intranet Solutions -- http://www.aptanet.com/
I think you meant this to go to the list Paul :o)
I've always used PartitionMagic (I've got Version 6.0 but they're up to 8.0 at present) which has served me very well. but it's not GPL or GNU/Linux though credit where it's due.
Amazon has the latest release of PM for 40UKP and also the back release 7.0 at 25UKP http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/202-8112773-2091046
Never been unlucky enough to have to recover from the sort of problems you describe but I've no doubt someone on the list will have some war stories to tell :o)
Regards,
Keith ____________ The shortest answer is doing. George Herbert
** Keith Watson keith.watson@kewill.com [2003-05-28 11:46]:
Not actually booted my CD and tried it, but apparently yes parted is on Knoppix apparently (can't find the link I found the quote on, but it was from Knoppix 3.2 onwards). Some other useful links you may be interested in:
[snip]
Thanks for the excellent links Paul, especially the one for PartImage.
No problem. It happens to be something I'm looking into myself, partly for speeding up the install process for machine (Windows 98 primarily unfortunately), and partly to recover some data on a couple of drives I'm having problems with.
One seems to have a duff sector which is preventing access to a partition (Fujitsu 20G, newest drive I had until I bought a replacement, but not one of the notorious ones), and the other (again a Fujitsu, but 13G this time) which seems to have lost partition information on the transfer to another machine.
I'm trying to work out whether Parted will recover things for me, or whether I'm better off to go with one of two commercial solutions I've found:
Acronis RecoverExpert - looks good because it supports Linux Ext2, Ext3, ReiserFS, and Linux Swap as well as the traditional Windows formats, but the demo is only the Windows GUI version (not the boot disk). This has a few issues booting with the drive 13G drive connected (so I can't get any idea of whether it will recover it) and with the 20G it just shows the partition as duff (it seems as though it simply recovers lost partitions rather than fixing corrupt ones).
Active Partition Recovery - only supports FAT and NTFS partitions, but the boot disk can see and read all the partitions in question and show me the data, so it has a distinct attraction in that respect!
Both about 30usd - if anyone has used either of these, or Parted or another utility to recover a partition problem I'd be interested to hear.
Oh, my tape backup is giving me hassle too - I'm not a happy penguin at the moment. Having said that, my Linux machines are going strong and it is only my Windows 2000 that is givin me hassle (duff hardware and the tape backups which verified fine are not allowing me to access them now that I've lost the boot drive that they were created from - classic backup!).
I think you meant this to go to the list Paul :o)
I've always used PartitionMagic (I've got Version 6.0 but they're up to 8.0 at present) which has served me very well. but it's not GPL or GNU/Linux though credit where it's due.
Amazon has the latest release of PM for 40UKP and also the back release 7.0 at 25UKP http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/202-8112773-2091046
Never been unlucky enough to have to recover from the sort of problems you describe but I've no doubt someone on the list will have some war stories to tell :o)
** end quote [Keith Watson]
Oh, fnuts, done it again. Thanks Keith. I think this and the Linux1394 list must the the only two lists that don't set the reply to be the list - they're certainly the only ones I make this mistake on.
Anyway, yes, I use Partition Magic myself. I have version 5 that I got some time ago from PC World (don't cringe, it was about 15 quid and probably reduced due to the release of v6, I can't remember). I've also got a cover disk copy of Drive Image 4 that I've used to recover another drive that died (on my partents machine - a Quantum that developed a head ding). I manage to keep it running long enough to image it, which I then restored to the new drive. Very nice, apart from the fact that Windows fouled up the drive letters after I added new partitions to make use of the extra drive capacite (thank goodness for Letter Assigner).
Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
Oh, fnuts, done it again. Thanks Keith. I think this and the Linux1394 list must the the only two lists that don't set the reply to be the list
- they're certainly the only ones I make this mistake on.
For the nth time, if you really can't cope with a mailing list that behaves itself, your choices are:-
1. Use a filter to add a reply-to header to incoming email with our List-Id header;
2. Use a better mail client, one that recognises RFC-2919 headers (next release of GNUMail will, for you GUI users);
3. Learn to "reply to all" when you want to "reply to all".
Can the FAQ maintainer (Adam?) please patch this one into it? Ta.
On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 10:19:25PM -0000, MJ Ray wrote:
Can the FAQ maintainer (Adam?) please patch this one into it? Ta.
yeah, noted np. Will be done on the next FAQ update (RSN)
Adam
MJ Ray markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk wrote:
For the nth time, if you really can't cope with a mailing list that behaves itself, your choices are:-
I've been asked elsewhere to justify "behaves itself".
I was once misled by a poorly configured mailing list into sending an individual message to 3000 or so people worldwide working on a similar topic to what I was doing at the time. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it's hard to put it back and it's quite messy, too.
That's what I consider misbehaving with reply-to. This list does the opposite. I'd rather not cause anyone that embarrasment.
** MJ Ray markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk [2003-05-28 23:18]:
Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
Oh, fnuts, done it again. Thanks Keith. I think this and the Linux1394 list must the the only two lists that don't set the reply to be the list
- they're certainly the only ones I make this mistake on.
For the nth time, if you really can't cope with a mailing list that behaves itself, your choices are:-
Second for me I think, but that's not an issue. Sorry if it seemed like a complaint, I'm a little flat out at the moment and possible becoming a bit short in my tone. This appears to be one of ony two lists I'm on that use this particular setup, so if I've not posted for a while I tend to forget - sorry.
- Use a filter to add a reply-to header to incoming email with our
List-Id header;
Interesting thought.
- Use a better mail client, one that recognises RFC-2919 headers (next
release of GNUMail will, for you GUI users);
I use Mutt, not aware that it was considered a poort client, and it's certainly not GUI ;-) What I do need to do though is sort out configuring lists in the muttrc file.
- Learn to "reply to all" when you want to "reply to all".
As I said, merely me forgetting that I need to on this list. Apologies again. As an a thought, the Debian lists must use the same setup, surely. It's a while since I posted to one though.
Can the FAQ maintainer (Adam?) please patch this one into it? Ta.
** end quote [MJ Ray]
On 2003-05-29 09:43:58 +0100 Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
- Use a better mail client, one that recognises RFC-2919 headers
(next release of GNUMail will, for you GUI users);
I use Mutt, not aware that it was considered a poort client [...]
It is when it comes to mailing lists. With the number of people who claim to be hackers using it, I'm amazed if it still hasn't got List-* headers supported. Having to tell it what is a list post by reading the to-line is so 1980s... nearly as much fun as procmail.
From: MJ Ray
On 2003-05-29 09:43:58 +0100 Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
- Use a better mail client, one that recognises RFC-2919 headers
(next release of GNUMail will, for you GUI users);
I use Mutt, not aware that it was considered a poort client [...]
It is when it comes to mailing lists. With the number of people who claim to be hackers using it, I'm amazed if it still hasn't got List-* headers supported. Having to tell it what is a list post by reading the to-line is so 1980s... nearly as much fun as procmail.
Ahh!, but remember the basic ideas behind unix are of 1970's vintage (nostalgia strikes!) so its got a way to go yet:o)
But it is irritating how 'badly behaved' even some of the most sophisticated mail-readers are. I use MS Outlook here at work and that's a complete pile of No.2s (I'd hesitate to even call it a mail reader). At home I use Sylpheed and even that throws the odd wobbler.
I've just learned not to trust the technology! (much) :o)
Keith ____________ Make the most of yourself, for that is all there is to you. Ralph Waldo Emerson
On Wed, 28 May 2003, MJ Ray wrote:
For the nth time, if you really can't cope with a mailing list that behaves itself, your choices are:-
- Use a filter to add a reply-to header to incoming email with our
List-Id header;
- Use a better mail client, one that recognises RFC-2919 headers (next
release of GNUMail will, for you GUI users);
- Learn to "reply to all" when you want to "reply to all".
How about a little bit of politeness and respect?
On a quick poll of the many lists I'm subscribed to, most set reply-to headers automatically. Whether it's the correct thing to do it or not, the fact is that for some people, this is how they expect lists to behave.
So, rather than "if you can't cope", "learn to", "use a better mail client", how about "Sorry to hear about your troubles. We don't set reply-to because it's considered bad. Here's some of the things you could try that may work for you"?
Andrew.
Andrew Savory lists@andrewsavory.com wrote:
How about a little bit of politeness and respect?
Sorry. The message I replied to was a little terse too, not the first time that person had raised this, added nothing new to the topic, and is definitely a FAQ. Is this a better summary for the FAQ maintainer:
Setting reply-to is non-standard, destroys data and breaks some mail clients, so neither setting nor leaving it pleases everyone. In the absence of consensus, this list supports RFC-2369 and RFC-2919 (email headers that start List-) so that good email software can be customised to do whatever its owner wants. You can do this with filters that set a Reply-To (eg using maildrop with formail) or specific mailing list support settings in your email reader.
?
Now, how about you being polite and respectful too? ;-)
On Thu, 29 May 2003, MJ Ray wrote:
Sorry. The message I replied to was a little terse too, not the first time that person had raised this, added nothing new to the topic, and is definitely a FAQ.
Can a link to the FAQ be made available on the mailman archive page?
Setting reply-to is non-standard, destroys data and breaks some mail clients, so neither setting nor leaving it pleases everyone.
Or perhaps just a link to a discussion of the problems associated with reply-to, such as at http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
In the absence of consensus, this list supports RFC-2369 and RFC-2919 (email headers that start List-) so that good email software can be customised to do whatever its owner wants. You can do this with filters that set a Reply-To (eg using maildrop with formail) or specific mailing list support settings in your email reader.
Again, links to references on how to tweak mail programs would be a friendly thing to do.
Now, how about you being polite and respectful too? ;-)
My previous response (and this one) have been carefully crafted to be as polite and respectful as possible. If there's something you took offense to, please let me know so I can avoid it in future.
Cheers,
Andrew.
Andrew Savory lists@andrewsavory.com wrote:
Can a link to the FAQ be made available on the mailman archive page?
Yes. The FAQ keeper is one of the list admins.
[...]
Again, links to references on how to tweak mail programs would be a friendly thing to do.
Choice is a wonderful thing but also means you'll have to help with documenting that by telling us how your email program does it.
On my side: from the next release, GNUMail will offer "reply to list" on list emails.
[...] If there's something you took offense to, please let me know so I can avoid it in future.
USian spelling now? Is your hair turning green? ;-)
On Thursday 29 May 2003 2:08 pm, MJ Ray wrote:
Andrew Savory lists@andrewsavory.com wrote:
How about a little bit of politeness and respect?
Sorry. The message I replied to was a little terse too, not the first time that person had raised this, added nothing new to the topic, and is definitely a FAQ.
I am seriuosly disappointed you should feel it necessary to make such personal remarks in a public forum.
Ian
** Ian Bell ian@redtommo.com [2003-05-29 19:25]:
How about a little bit of politeness and respect?
Sorry. The message I replied to was a little terse too, not the first time that person had raised this, added nothing new to the topic, and is definitely a FAQ.
I am seriuosly disappointed you should feel it necessary to make such personal remarks in a public forum.
** end quote [Ian Bell]
Don't worry about it, I'm not and it was directed at me! I was a little terse, although it was aimed at myself more than anything - annoyance that I'd done it again (ending with a thought as to why I'm not more aware of it - thinking further there I'm on several Debian ones, and I'm sure Mark has the AFFS one setup the same, so it's only an occaisional slip). I'm a little hassled right now :-( It was discussed before, and I can see both sides of the argument (unfortunately I often do). As far as I was concerned the discussion had been and gone.
A more useful follow on may be to list those mail clients that support the List- headers. I'm off to do a search.
Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
sure Mark has the AFFS one setup the same
Jaime Villate and Andy Fletcher were running that list long before I started helping with the message queue. I don't think I've edited that list config, but I might be forgetting.
[...]
A more useful follow on may be to list those mail clients that support the List- headers. I'm off to do a search.
Please let us know what you find. A recent list would be a good addition to the web.
** MJ Ray markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk [2003-05-29 23:58]:
sure Mark has the AFFS one setup the same
Jaime Villate and Andy Fletcher were running that list long before I started helping with the message queue. I don't think I've edited that list config, but I might be forgetting.
[...]
A more useful follow on may be to list those mail clients that support the List- headers. I'm off to do a search.
Please let us know what you find. A recent list would be a good addition to the web.
** end quote [MJ Ray]
So far not so good, Google is not being to helpful, I need to rethink my search terms or hit mail client sites direct and read. I'll let you know though.
On a more positive note, I have delved into my muttrc file and configured the lists in there now. Just need to trundle through my procmail configuration and nab them all from there - there must be an easier way!
Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
So far not so good, Google is not being to helpful, I need to rethink my search terms or hit mail client sites direct and read. I'll let you know though.
I found this list, but it's from 1998 and I think they are old proprietary software: http://www.nisto.com/listspec/#APPLICATION-SUPPORT
Looking at some client sites to start us off, I see:
Mozilla has a bug open about this at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29041
KMail seems to have "Mailing list aware" folders, but I can't understand whether it supports these RFCs from the manual. If you know one way or the other, please send a correction to the manual!
Evolution has buggy support for it (but should work with ALUG main).
Balsa doesn't (FAQ reads like "the reply-to situation" is not anything they need to help fix and all the fault of bad list admins).
GNUMail should have it in next version, as I said.
mutt currently has no support for it!
** MJ Ray markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk [2003-05-30 15:55]:
Paul Tansom paul@aptanet.com wrote:
So far not so good, Google is not being to helpful, I need to rethink my search terms or hit mail client sites direct and read. I'll let you know though.
I found this list, but it's from 1998 and I think they are old proprietary software: http://www.nisto.com/listspec/#APPLICATION-SUPPORT
Looking at some client sites to start us off, I see:
Mozilla has a bug open about this at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29041
KMail seems to have "Mailing list aware" folders, but I can't understand whether it supports these RFCs from the manual. If you know one way or the other, please send a correction to the manual!
Evolution has buggy support for it (but should work with ALUG main).
Balsa doesn't (FAQ reads like "the reply-to situation" is not anything they need to help fix and all the fault of bad list admins).
GNUMail should have it in next version, as I said.
mutt currently has no support for it!
** end quote [MJ Ray]
Hmm, not to encouraging so far then. There is a common problem with mailing list replies, and the 'easy' solution for the client with current software is not the ideal way of doing things (i.e. reply-to munging). An RFC (or two) has been raised, but software support is not forthcoming that quickly - frustrating to say the least! Sounds like configuring my Mutt may be the best solution for now - I'll keep hunting though.
On Friday 30 May 2003 14:53, MJ Ray wrote:
KMail seems to have "Mailing list aware" folders, but I can't understand whether it supports these RFCs from the manual.
I use Kmail and it behaves thus.
In the properties of the ALUG child folder I have ticked the "Folder holds a mailing list" and set the list address as main@lists.alug.org.uk
If I create a new message while having this folder selected it sets the address correctly.
Clicking reply to a message reply's to the originator.
Clicking reply to all reply's to both the originator and the list.
So all in all and for the purposes of this conversation, it's not that clever I don't know enough about the RFC'S you mention to completely answer your question though.
Wayne Stallwood wayne.stallwood@btinternet.com wrote:
So all in all and for the purposes of this conversation, it's not that clever I don't know enough about the RFC'S you mention to completely answer your question though.
10 000 metre view:
RFC-2369 describes the List-Post, List-Unsubscribe etc headers, so that email programs can offer a reliable "list reply" facility, and optionally other list management functions if it wishes.
RFC-2919 describes the List-Id header, so that at least email programs can reliably spot mailing lists. In theory, this remains constant even if the list changes machine, but in practice that isn't often done properly.
Can someone ask KMail's developers about it? It's always better coming from someone who actually uses the software.
Ian Bell ian@redtommo.com wrote:
I am seriuosly disappointed you should feel it necessary to make such personal remarks in a public forum.
Paul has already said he was in a hurry and just referring to it in passing, so I'm not sure why you are leaping to his defence. Nevertheless, I apologise to Paul.
-
Adam Bower -
Andrew Savory -
Ian Bell -
Keith Watson -
MJ Ray -
Paul Tansom -
Wayne Stallwood