- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Stat Gathering

by Marc Hughes

Hey Guys, I'd like to collect some stats on a few servers over time. Things like bandwidth usage, load averages, used/free memory, disk I/O. Does anyone have any favorite tools to do this easily. Also... Anything that makes pretty graphs to show management would be bonus points. Thanks, -Marc

Sept. 9, 2002

Re: [Wlug] overlay/watermark???

by Bill Mills-Curran

On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Keith Wright wrote: > Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 13:55:46 -0400 > From: Keith Wright <kwright(a)gis.net> > Reply-To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > Subject: Re: [Wlug] overlay/watermark??? > > > From: Bill Mills-Curran <subssn594(a)charter.net> > > > > I'm generating a document with good old latex, and I'd like to be able > > to add a figure as the background to each page, something like a > > watermark, or the background capability of html. > > > > I'd be happy to use a post-processing step to do this. I've been > > looking at the ps utilities, but there's nothing that looks like it > > will work. > > > > Any ideas? > > Make a PostScript graphic to fill the page, and use any graphic > package you can find ( \usepackage{epsfig} works for me ) > to tell TeX to put a tiny little box in the page header, which > contains your big graphic. TeX doesn't care if your graphic > (or anything else) is bigger than the box, it just needs the > box to know how much space to leave, but you, you pervert, > want to print something and leave no space for it. It should > work fine in a technical sense, but promise me the background > will be very light and sparse, or I shall revile and shun your > document. > > -- Keith <snip> I found something that was made for the task... draftcopy. It's meant to put the word "draft" as a watermark on each page. One of the options is to change the word "draft" to something else. (Text is all I wanted on the watermark.) Thanks, Bill

Sept. 5, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Bill Smith

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 21:22:25 -0400 Andy Stewart <andystewart(a)attbi.com> wrote: AS> I would like to note that I have expressed WLUG's general AS> displeasure with BUG to the president of BUG, Rick Zach. He told me AS> that the calendar issue would be cleared up if we chose to renew our AS> membership. they'll fix our link issue if we choose to renew? sounds almost like a hostage situation.... 8\ AS> Clint Moyer is quite correct when he points out that WLUG can afford AS> the $50 if we so choose, but unfortunately we're not at five figures AS> in the bank (unless you count the two figures for cents). :-) all the more reason to watch the pennies... AS> Certainly, if we did decide to renew, I would attend any/all BUG AS> meetings, insure that WLUG had a presence at the MegaMeeting, etc. AS> I did this last year after we paid our initial $50 membership fee. that's good to SOME extent, since it pretty-much gives us visibility, but would it be worth the money? AS> I'll sit back a bit longer and wait for any other comments from WLUG AS> members on this topic. I'll probably close the topic by this AS> weekend, unless the discussion is lively at that time. i certainly hope others chime in... i've already cast my "vote"... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- William Smith wsmith-at-chezsmith-dot-com Fall River, MA http://www.chezsmith.com Wherever you go, there you are. * TAG! v3.0 *

Sept. 5, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Andy Stewart

HI Everybody, I've enjoyed sitting back for a couple of days, resting my carpal tunnels, and reading the opinions of the WLUG membership. I would like to note that I have expressed WLUG's general displeasure with BUG to the president of BUG, Rick Zach. He told me that the calendar issue would be cleared up if we chose to renew our membership. Clint Moyer is quite correct when he points out that WLUG can afford the $50 if we so choose, but unfortunately we're not at five figures in the bank (unless you count the two figures for cents). :-) Certainly, if we did decide to renew, I would attend any/all BUG meetings, insure that WLUG had a presence at the MegaMeeting, etc. I did this last year after we paid our initial $50 membership fee. I'll sit back a bit longer and wait for any other comments from WLUG members on this topic. I'll probably close the topic by this weekend, unless the discussion is lively at that time. Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA USA http://www.wlug.org

Sept. 5, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Importing email from Eudora or Outlook...

by Stephen C. Daukas

Karl Hiramoto wrote: >Use an IMAP server. store your folders on the server. IMAP suports >sub-folders. Then you access your e-mail independent of your mail >client. > IMAP may be of help in the future, but it doesn't address the issue I'm having now.

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Bill Smith

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 00:56:35 -0400 "Charles R. Anderson" <cra(a)WPI.EDU> wrote: CRA> Remember, we can always join at a future date if things change. CRA> Right now, though, I don't think we got anything out of our last CRA> year's membership. Maybe we can invite one of their folk to speak CRA> at an upcoming meeting to try to convince us of why we should CRA> re-join. that is probably a good idea... Andy? CRA> Worcester isn't Boston. Maybe we should start our own CRA> WorcesterUserGroups.org :) We are, after all, the second largest CRA> city in New England... (kidding...) well... i'm in Fall River... whenever i decide to make a meeting, i have something like an hour to drive.... 8\ Fall River != Worcester. <shrug> <g> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- William Smith wsmith-at-chezsmith-dot-com Fall River, MA http://www.chezsmith.com Macho Law prohibits me from admitting I'm wrong. * TAG! v3.0 *

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Charles R. Anderson

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 11:34:17PM -0400, Bill Smith wrote: wsmith> Another poster (forgot the name... sorry.) suggested that the $50 would wsmith> be better spent paying for an advert in the paper. i'm inclined to wsmith> agree (although i might lean towards something like the Globe or wsmith> something like that, not just a college paper). wsmith> wsmith> if the matter is still under discussion, i vote "no". My vote is also "no". $50 isn't worth a broken "Javascript" link (doesn't work in lynx or links) on a web site that can't even put our meeting schedule on their calendar. Why do they have a .com anyway? I'm sure we can think of much better ways to spend $50. I love the idea of the ad in the paper, too. Remember, we can always join at a future date if things change. Right now, though, I don't think we got anything out of our last year's membership. Maybe we can invite one of their folk to speak at an upcoming meeting to try to convince us of why we should re-join. Worcester isn't Boston. Maybe we should start our own WorcesterUserGroups.org :) We are, after all, the second largest city in New England... (kidding...) -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] WLUG's membership in BUG

by Bill Smith

On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 12:17:10 -0400 "Clint Moyer" <cdmoyer(a)charter.net> wrote: CM> I vote YES. It's only $50 and WLUG's cash on hand is well CM> into five figures. ;) CM> CM> If some people feel somewhat bruised by a tangential CM> connection to MS, well that's kind of sad. $50 is $50.... Regardless of the actual COST, I'd think the focus is more of "what does BUG do for US?"... Apparently, not too much. Basically, the benefits are: - Other BUG members will know you exist. - We [BUG] have a once-a-year bash to get everyone the chance to see who else is a BUG. - WLUG gives BUG $50. Another poster (forgot the name... sorry.) suggested that the $50 would be better spent paying for an advert in the paper. i'm inclined to agree (although i might lean towards something like the Globe or something like that, not just a college paper). if the matter is still under discussion, i vote "no". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- William Smith wsmith-at-chezsmith-dot-com Fall River, MA http://www.chezsmith.com The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity. The rest is overhead for the operating system. * TAG! v3.0 *

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] RH7.3 Questions -round 4

by Richard Goodman

That did the trick! Not only that, there's a comment in the sendmail.mc file just above that line -- only as a non-techie I never looked in sendmail.mc While I was at it I also dnl'd out the FEATURE("accept_unresolvable_domains") line. I believe my access file is tight enough - its been bouncing lots of attempted open relaying for months. Dick >On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 07:33:49PM -0400, Richard Goodman wrote: >dick> Well, I thought everything was working, but sendmail won't receive mail. >dick> Has something changed between the versions of sendmail on >RH7.0 and RH7.3 > >Yes, exactly. Red Hat (or Sendmail, I forget) changed the default for >sendmail to listen only on 127.0.0.1, to prevent insecure default open >mail relays. This is mentioned in the Red Hat 7.3 Release Notes.... > >To fix it, edit /etc/mail/sendmail.mc. Find the line with >"Port=smtp,Addr=127.0.0.1, Name=MTA". Comment it out by putting dnl at >the beginning of that line. Then regenerate the /etc/sendmail.cf from >the mc file like this: > >m4 /etc/mail/sendmail.mc > /etc/sendmail.cf > >And please limit access to sendmail properly so you don't become an open >relay (/etc/mail/access)! > >-- >Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/

Sept. 4, 2002

Re: [Wlug] spamassassin

by Theo Van Dinter

On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:57:31PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > Cool. Why are the RPMs "courtesy of Craig Hughes" then, and point to a > FTP site with 2.20 as the latest? Or was 2.40 the only newer release > since then (a recent release I take it)? I'm not the official distribution site, but I seem to be faster at making RPMs than Craig. The history, BTW, is that Craig made the first 2.[12]* RPMs, and I modified them a bit somewhere around 2.20. They stayed about the same for 2.3, and then completely changed for 2.4 which gathered some errors which I then fixed earlier today. <shrug> It's an interesting project, Justin Mason (the original author) took 6-12 months off to travel around Asia and handed the project to Craig. I think that was around 2.1 or 2.2. Things have been progressing, 2.21, then 2.30, then 2.31, where it stayed for quite a while. Craig decided to start Deersoft for SpamAssassin Pro (Windows-based plugins for Outlook/Exchange), and somewhere in the same period Justin came back. So I'm now not sure who's actually in control of the project, but it's progressing still. I think this is part of the reason why 2.41 is due out shortly. There's been a whole heck of a lot of work put into the 2.40 code, and then the release sorta doesn't go out smoothly, and bugs are found (I'd like to slap the people who changed my Razor2 code) that apparently weren't fully tested with all the other changes. I'm sure it'll get better as we go on. :) -- Randomly Generated Tagline: "With a PC, I always felt limited by the software available. On Unix, I am limited only by my knowledge." - Peter Schoenster

Sept. 4, 2002