RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-21 Thread Alan Munday
Chris > -Original Message- > From: Chris Thielen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 21 January 2004 14:17 > To: Alan Munday > Subject: RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour > > > On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 20:12, Alan Munday wrote: > > Chris > > >

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-21 Thread Robert Leonard III
- Original Message - From: "Chris Thielen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jay Levitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 3:01 AM Subject: Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 22:1

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-21 Thread Chris Thielen
On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 22:11, Jay Levitt wrote: > One problem: If a spamassassin --lint fails (because if you, oh, had > outdated directives in your sa-mimedefang.cf file), then once you correct > that, on the next run, rules_du_jour won't update anything, because it > thinks everything is up to dat

blackhair problem (Re: RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour)

2004-01-19 Thread Arpi
Hi, > Correct. The only set going through frequent revisions right now is > "Chickenpox". I think I'm about to post a revision on Backhair/Popcorn, > but that will be the first change in months. Still, they will not go i've found a major problem with blachhair set today: it catches most of the

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-19 Thread Jay Levitt
is Thielen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Martin Radford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Charles Gregory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 6:02 PM Subject: Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour > All, thi

RE: blackhair problem (Re: RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour)

2004-01-19 Thread Jennifer Wheeler
> Hi, > > > Correct. The only set going through frequent revisions right now is > > "Chickenpox". I think I'm about to post a revision on Backhair/Popcorn, > > but that will be the first change in months. Still, they will not go > > i've found a major problem with blachhair set today: it catch

blackhair problem (Re: RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour)

2004-01-19 Thread Arpi
Hi, > Correct. The only set going through frequent revisions right now is > "Chickenpox". I think I'm about to post a revision on Backhair/Popcorn, > but that will be the first change in months. Still, they will not go i've found a major problem with blachhair set today: it catches most of the

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Chris Thielen
All, this message tried to address most of the comments made regarding RulesDuJour so far. On Sun, 2004-01-18 at 12:50, Martin Radford wrote: > At Sun Jan 18 16:06:13 2004, Charles Gregory wrote: > > > A thought, and a suggestion: > > > > Thought: Some of the rules in 'rules du jour' look like t

RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Scott Harris
> > > > My wget client checks for a newer file, or did I miss your point? > > wget "cheats". It issues a "HEAD" command, and checks the timestamp. > If it turns out that it needs the file, then it issues a > "GET" command for it. > > This obviously saves downloading the file multiple times, bu

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Martin Radford
At Sun Jan 18 20:41:08 2004, Scott Harris wrote: > > HTTP provides a straightforward way to avoid repeated > > downloads of a file that hasn't changed, by sending > > If-Modified-Since requests. > > > > Unfortunately wget doesn't yet support this, though it is > > mentioned in its TODO file.

RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Scott Harris
> > HTTP provides a straightforward way to avoid repeated > downloads of a file that hasn't changed, by sending > If-Modified-Since requests. > > Unfortunately wget doesn't yet support this, though it is > mentioned in its TODO file. (This is with wget 1.9.1, which > is the current > ve

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Martin Radford
At Sun Jan 18 16:06:13 2004, Charles Gregory wrote: > A thought, and a suggestion: > > Thought: Some of the rules in 'rules du jour' look like they are fairly > 'stable'. There is no reason to be downloading 'backhair' or 'weeds' > everyday, is there? > > Suggestion: For frequent changers, like

RE: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Jennifer Wheeler
(Didn't mean to go offlist with my reply. Here it is again) > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Jonathan Nichols wrote: > > rules_du_jour is kind of neat, but I hope it's not going to drive up > > Chris & Jennifer's bandwidth bills or som 'em over a quota. :P > > A thought, and a suggestion: > > Thought: So

Re: [WL] [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-18 Thread Charles Gregory
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Jonathan Nichols wrote: > rules_du_jour is kind of neat, but I hope it's not going to drive up > Chris & Jennifer's bandwidth bills or som 'em over a quota. :P A thought, and a suggestion: Thought: Some of the rules in 'rules du jour' look like they are fairly 'stable'. Ther

RE: [SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-17 Thread Jennifer Wheeler
> > rules_du_jour is kind of neat, but I hope it's not going to drive up > Chris & Jennifer's bandwidth bills or som 'em over a quota. :P > > Would it be possible to add a mirror or two? I've got a fairly empty T1 > that could help out.. I think mine _should_ be okay, especially if it's staggere

[SAtalk] Yikes.. rules_du_jour

2004-01-17 Thread Jonathan Nichols
rules_du_jour is kind of neat, but I hope it's not going to drive up Chris & Jennifer's bandwidth bills or som 'em over a quota. :P Would it be possible to add a mirror or two? I've got a fairly empty T1 that could help out.. -Jonathan --- Th