Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup IPs. Don't remember seeing similar probes before. Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Am Di, den 02.08.2005 schrieb Aleksandar Milivojevic um 23:06:
Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup IPs. Don't remember seeing similar probes before. Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-05:19.ipsec.asc
Alexander
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 00:32 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Di, den 02.08.2005 schrieb Aleksandar Milivojevic um 23:06:
Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup IPs. Don't remember seeing similar probes before. Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-05:19.ipsec.asc
Alexander
What relevance to Centos 4.1 does this have?
Ted
Am Mi, den 03.08.2005 schrieb Ted Kaczmarek um 1:14:
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 00:32 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Di, den 02.08.2005 schrieb Aleksandar Milivojevic um 23:06:
Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup IPs. Don't remember seeing similar probes before. Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-05:19.ipsec.asc
Alexander
What relevance to Centos 4.1 does this have?
Ted
Do script kids in first instance care for the OS of the target host when they run scripts? My reply was meant as a possible return to the part " Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) re trying out, or is this some old stuff?".
Alexander
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 01:21 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Mi, den 03.08.2005 schrieb Ted Kaczmarek um 1:14:
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 00:32 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Di, den 02.08.2005 schrieb Aleksandar Milivojevic um 23:06:
Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup IPs. Don't remember seeing similar probes before. Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-05:19.ipsec.asc
Alexander
What relevance to Centos 4.1 does this have?
Ted
Do script kids in first instance care for the OS of the target host when they run scripts? My reply was meant as a possible return to the part " Some new vaulnerability that script kiddies (and pro crackers) re trying out, or is this some old stuff?".
Alexander
Loud and clear :-)
Ted
centos-bounces@centos.org <> scribbled on Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:15 PM:
On Wed, 2005-08-03 at 00:32 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Di, den 02.08.2005 schrieb Aleksandar Milivojevic um 23:06:
Last couple of days some of my hosts were probed for UDP port 500 (IKE daemon, used by IPSec for key exchange) from dialup
IPs. Don't
remember seeing similar probes before. Some new
vaulnerability that
script kiddies (and pro crackers) are trying out, or is this some old stuff? I do remember there were some security problems with racoon in the past (that were fixed in current CentOS ipsec-tools packages), but don't remember reading anywhere there were any automated tools to exploit it floating around. Or are
there some new flaws discovered recently in some IKE implementations?
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/CERT/advisories/FreeBSD-SA-05:19.ips
ec.asc
Alexander
What relevance to Centos 4.1 does this have?
Ted
Since when is this list dedicated to Centos 4.1?
Mike
* On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 06:51:22PM -0500 Mike Kercher wrote:
Since when is this list dedicated to Centos 4.1?
Mike
The dedication of this list to Centos was compromised starting on April 15 of this year.
Mark
On 8/4/05, Mark Frank mark@mark-and-erika.com wrote:
The dedication of this list to Centos was compromised starting on April 15 of this year.
I assume this is a jab at Mr. Bryan Smith which is both invalid (it was offtopic before that, namely I was offtopic several times that month before Bryan made his first post) and your post is off topic itself - how delightfully ironic.
Besides, it's not like you've been captain on topic: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-May/005653.html
BTW, Centos admins, as I was researching this cryptic insult I noticed that Mar2005 messages contain a link at the bottom to caosity.org instead of centos.org The former links, naturally, don't work.
Regards, Greg
* On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 08:29:06PM -0600 Greg Knaddison wrote:
On 8/4/05, Mark Frank mark@mark-and-erika.com wrote:
The dedication of this list to Centos was compromised starting on April 15 of this year.
I assume this is a jab at Mr. Bryan Smith which is both invalid (it was offtopic before that, namely I was offtopic several times that month before Bryan made his first post) and your post is off topic itself - how delightfully ironic.
Besides, it's not like you've been captain on topic: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-May/005653.html
BTW, Centos admins, as I was researching this cryptic insult I noticed
Hmmm, you replied in less than 15 minutes - maybe being cryptic is not my strong suit.
Mark
* On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 11:42:28PM -0400 Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 22:48 -0400, Mark Frank wrote:
Hmmm, you replied in less than 15 minutes - maybe being cryptic is not my strong suit.
Perhaps you should go back to practicing your lurking skills. Have been pretty successful at it since May 10. :-)
Yes, lurking IS my strong suit!
Thanks for your input.
Mark
Mark Frank thought he was 'l33t when he wrote:
The dedication of this list to Centos was compromised starting on April 15 of this year.
Greg Knaddison then responded with the obvious:
I assume this is a jab at Mr. Bryan Smith
First off, I don't mind legitimate complaints against me. I get them all-the-time and I try to accommodate.
However, there are always 2-3 on every that ... (continued below)
which is both invalid (it was offtopic before that, namely I was offtopic several times that month before Bryan made his first post) and your post is off topic itself - how delightfully ironic.
A) have a "problem" with me in general, B) would rather make public insults than take it up with me, C) aren't not exactly the most "pure" themselves, which means D) they are being hypocritical, and E) are ultimately _unobjective_ in their complaint
I don't mind Joe list lurker or John contributor to complain about me. Such complaints are objective and I will try to accommodate.
When in doubt, blame all list problems in me. ;-> It wouldn't be the first time, and it won't be the last.
On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 23:34 -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
When in doubt, blame all list problems in me. ;-> It wouldn't be the first time, and it won't be the last.
Just so everyone knows, I joined the original cAos list on 2004Nov24. I largely lurked and helped people off-list.
When the CentOS change came about in 2005Mar, I subscribed to the new list on 2005Mar29. I lurked a bit longer and then just decided to help people on-list starting mid-April.
Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm sure the verbosity of my posts are something many people dislike as well -- e.g., some people feel like I'm treating everyone like they're a 'noob in my posts. I'd rather give more info in case it's needed than not and leave someone scratching their head.
But I do find it ironic that sometimes I get sole blame for things when I clearly see others participating in the thread, let alone many took it off-topic in the first place.
If the general, or even a significant minority, consensus is that my posts are indeed too off-topic, I'll go back to lurking and helping off- list. I have no problem with that, and do it all-the-time.
On 8/5/05, Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote:
Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm sure the verbosity of my posts are something many people dislike as well
Speaking for myself found many details offered by you interesting and insightful. But then I am just a tinkerer and newbie.
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm sure the verbosity of my posts are something many people dislike as well
Great, now, I'm going to be guilty of OT, but I'll try to keep it short.
It seems to me that you *have* been trying to curb "that" recently. I've noticed. While I appreciate your technical knowledge, and your eagerness to share it with us, I believe keeping posts short and to the point is more compelling to the reader. People tend to get bored and search for that "Delete" button. Let `em come to you with their requests for the gory details.
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
<SNIP> Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm <SNIP> If the general, or even a significant minority, consensus is that my posts are indeed too off-topic, I'll go back to lurking and helping off- list. I have no problem with that, and do it all-the-time.
Hi folks,
Other lists use the 'OT' prefix to indicate that a subject has gone 'off topic'. Some of you have done this, and it's great. This assists in searching and sorting of list information as well as allowing email filters to remove the OT posts for those who don't wish to see them. Sometimes I like to read the OT posts, sometimes I just delete them in one swell foop.
Why don't we use this concept for this CentOS list? I've noticed that some of you have been doing so, but if we make it a mailing list rule, then we have the benefit of a) OT posters and those interested in their posts can still post, and b) those who don't wish to read OT posts can delete or filter as they see fit.
It is the responsibility of the originator of the OT discussion (no matter what the original thread may have been) to realize that he/she is going OT.
--Shawn
On 8/5/05, Shawn M. Jones smj@littleprojects.org wrote:
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
<SNIP> Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm <SNIP> If the general, or even a significant minority, consensus is that my posts are indeed too off-topic, I'll go back to lurking and helping off- list. I have no problem with that, and do it all-the-time.
Hi folks,
Other lists use the 'OT' prefix to indicate that a subject has gone 'off topic'. Some of you have done this, and it's great. This assists in searching and sorting of list information as well as allowing email filters to remove the OT posts for those who don't wish to see them. Sometimes I like to read the OT posts, sometimes I just delete them in one swell foop.
Why don't we use this concept for this CentOS list? I've noticed that some of you have been doing so, but if we make it a mailing list rule, then we have the benefit of a) OT posters and those interested in their posts can still post, and b) those who don't wish to read OT posts can delete or filter as they see fit.
It is the responsibility of the originator of the OT discussion (no matter what the original thread may have been) to realize that he/she is going OT.
--Shawn
LOL. Like this? Is it OK?
Hello Members,
I am in single user mode at the shell prompt. How do I get X to generate a new xorg.config file? I have pretty standard/common hardware, but X does not start and the system just hangs during boot up.
TIA, David Evennou
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:45:12AM -0400, David Evennou (Data Masters) enlightened us:
I am in single user mode at the shell prompt. How do I get X to generate a new xorg.config file? I have pretty standard/common hardware, but X does not start and the system just hangs during boot up.
Try system-config-display
Matt
Hi Matt,
I tried system-config-display with the resulting message:
Trying with card: NVIDIA GeForce FX (generic) xconf.py: Fatal IO error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :17.0.--display=:1: Fatal IO error 104 (Conenction reset by peer) on X server "17.0.
Ideas?
Thanks, David
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Hyclak" hyclak@math.ohiou.edu To: "CentOS mailing list" centos@centos.org Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 10:04 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Generating xorg.config
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 10:27:36AM -0400, David Evennou (Data Masters) enlightened us:
I tried system-config-display with the resulting message:
Trying with card: NVIDIA GeForce FX (generic) xconf.py: Fatal IO error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :17.0.--display=:1: Fatal IO error 104 (Conenction reset by peer) on X server "17.0.
Maybe try switching to runlevel 3 first by running telinit 3 Log in and run the command again and see what happens.
Matt
OK, that worked! X is running and I have the GUI on screen.
So, I think I should see a modified xorg.config.
Thanks, David
----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Hyclak" hyclak@math.ohiou.edu To: "CentOS mailing list" centos@centos.org Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [CentOS] Generating xorg.config
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 10:27 -0400, David Evennou (Data Masters) wrote:
Hi Matt, I tried system-config-display with the resulting message: Trying with card: NVIDIA GeForce FX (generic) xconf.py: Fatal IO error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :17.0.--display=:1: Fatal IO error 104 (Conenction reset by peer) on X server "17.0. Ideas?
When in doubt, "init 1" and run the X tool from "setup".
Also note what video card you are using? Give me the exact make/model.
Understand that the "generic" GeForce FX (NV30) might not work for latter FX cards (e.g., NV31, NV33, NV34, NV35, NV36, NV38 are different FX models).
A major factor is the support of various cards for a particular XFree/Xorg version.
MIT Freedomware "nv" driver in XFree86 releases: http://www.xfree86.org/4.1.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.1/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.3.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.4.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.5.0/nv.4.html
MIT Freedomware "nv" driver in X.org releases: http://www.x.org/X11R6.8.1/doc/nv.4.html http://www.x.org/X11R6.8.2/doc/nv.4.html
In the worst case, the nVidia Standardware "nvidia" driver is always an option for newer card support when you don't want to have to load a newer XFree/Xorg on an older distro.
Hi Bryan,
I have the FX5200-TD128 card.
My system is up now after I ran "system-config-display" in runlevel 3. (thanks Matt!)
I find it interesting that the difference in the new xorg.config file is:
old SECTION "ServerLayout" Identifier "Default Layout" new SECTION "ServerLayout" Identifier "single head configuration"
The "Device" SECTION still has (generic) for the GeForce FX BoardName.
Thanks for your help!
David
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org To: "CentOS mailing list" centos@centos.org Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 10:43 AM Subject: [CentOS] Re: Generating xorg.config -- varying "nv" driver supportbetween versions
On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 10:27 -0400, David Evennou (Data Masters) wrote:
Hi Matt, I tried system-config-display with the resulting message: Trying with card: NVIDIA GeForce FX (generic) xconf.py: Fatal IO error 104 (Connection reset by peer) on X server :17.0.--display=:1: Fatal IO error 104 (Conenction reset by peer) on X server "17.0. Ideas?
When in doubt, "init 1" and run the X tool from "setup".
Also note what video card you are using? Give me the exact make/model.
Understand that the "generic" GeForce FX (NV30) might not work for latter FX cards (e.g., NV31, NV33, NV34, NV35, NV36, NV38 are different FX models).
A major factor is the support of various cards for a particular XFree/Xorg version.
MIT Freedomware "nv" driver in XFree86 releases: http://www.xfree86.org/4.1.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.1/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.3.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.4.0/nv.4.html http://www.xfree86.org/4.5.0/nv.4.html
MIT Freedomware "nv" driver in X.org releases: http://www.x.org/X11R6.8.1/doc/nv.4.html http://www.x.org/X11R6.8.2/doc/nv.4.html
In the worst case, the nVidia Standardware "nvidia" driver is always an option for newer card support when you don't want to have to load a newer XFree/Xorg on an older distro.
-- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com
The best things in life are NOT free - which is why life is easiest if you save all the bills until you can share them with the perfect woman
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
"David Evennou (Data Masters)" de@data-masters.com wrote:
Hi Bryan, I have the FX5200-TD128 card.
FX5200/5500 = NV34. They are considered one of the poorest performing designs of its generation.
Despite having newer 3D features, those suckers are typically much slower than NV25/28 (GeForce4 Ti) series, even using those newer 3D features (which the GF4 Ti backfills in the driver). Of course, if you're running with the 2D-only MIT "nv" driver, that matters little. ;->
The "Device" SECTION still has (generic) for the GeForce FX BoardName.
Sometimes the NV30 driver will drive newer versions, but it's recommended you have a XFree/Xorg version with an "nv" driver that knows about the specifics of your GPU, namely NV34.
Thanks Bryan!
I have a few identical machines, to keep installs, etc. easier. I plan to use one or two of the machines for CAD work, so I will want to get better video cards.
What video card(s) do you recommend for high performance?
Thanks, David
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org To: "CentOS mailing list" centos@centos.org Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:32 AM Subject: [CentOS] Re: Generating xorg.config -- varying "nv" driversupportbetween versions
"David Evennou (Data Masters)" de@data-masters.com wrote:
Hi Bryan, I have the FX5200-TD128 card.
FX5200/5500 = NV34. They are considered one of the poorest performing designs of its generation.
Despite having newer 3D features, those suckers are typically much slower than NV25/28 (GeForce4 Ti) series, even using those newer 3D features (which the GF4 Ti backfills in the driver). Of course, if you're running with the 2D-only MIT "nv" driver, that matters little. ;->
The "Device" SECTION still has (generic) for the GeForce FX BoardName.
Sometimes the NV30 driver will drive newer versions, but it's recommended you have a XFree/Xorg version with an "nv" driver that knows about the specifics of your GPU, namely NV34.
-- Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org | (please excuse any http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers) _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
"David Evennou (Data Masters)" de@data-masters.com wrote:
Thanks Bryan! I have a few identical machines, to keep installs, etc. easier. I plan to use one or two of the machines for CAD work, so I will want to get better video cards. What video card(s) do you recommend for high performance?
Depends on what you define as "high performance?" This will differ between consumer and engineering applications. (i.e., what applications?)
For consumer, general and _some_ engineering, nVidia's Standardware (Open Standard, Proprietary Source) "nvidia" GLX drivers are the most stable and highest performing. nVidia's Quadro series are geared more towards engineering, typically with additional memory and other options. But even the GeForce 6800GT or latest 7800GTX does fairly well. And nVidia is the best when it comes to broad support for their cards under Linux.
ATI is quickly improving their Standardware driver line for newer cards, but they still seem to lag in broad support and stability versus nVidia. The limited Freedomware (Open Source, Open Standard) drivers developed by Precision Insight under contract from the Weather Channel (I believe?) are based on older R1x0/2x0 series cards, and clearly not engineering-quality. While some people have gotten the DRI GLX support to work with some newer RV2x0 series, and even a few R/RV3x0 series cards, the features are limited because ATI closed up all their 3D specs as of the R3x0 series. So ATI has now joined nVidia and Matrox in creating a proprietary source-only driver for 3D/GLX support.
nVidia actually opened its "unified driver" 3D specs back in the XFree 3.3.x days and NV0x (TNT2/early GeForce), but because of IP ownership by Intel, Microsoft and others, they found themselves in litigation. Although some UtahGLX and DRI work exists on these, the features are old and typically don't work past NV10/11/15/17 (GeForce2 to GeForce4 MX). Sadly enough, the catch-22 is that the best way to stable and performing OpenGL is to unify the driver code across Windows, Linux, MacOS X, etc... At the same time, that's an IP mindfield, hence why they are proprietary source. The former "clean room" endeavors by DRI are noble, but the performance and feature support (especially for engineering applications) leave much to be desired, hence why ATI joined nVidia and Matrox when it started to officially support Linux 3D/GLX.
Now more for engineering, 3DLabs has Linux GLX support as well with their drivers. Their newer Wildcat products have exception performance for engineering (not so good for general/consumer), although you'll typically pay for it (2-3x what nVidia GeForce/Quadros will get you). 3DLabs also adheres to strict OpenGL, and follows the Architectural Review Board (ARB) process to the letter. ATI and nVidia introducing various extensions, and it's up to you to figure out if they are supported by various applications. [ NOTE: OpenGL/ARB is still not as bad as "DirectX is a wrapper to vendor-specific APIs," but it's not as "clean" as OpenGL should be, and I agree with 3DLabs' viewpoint. ]
[ Professional Note: I know there is the cry for open source in Linux, but OpenGL is an IP mindfield -- especially on the "leading edge." But at least OpenGL over X11 (GLX) _is_ an "open standard," and had it not been for nVidia back in the 2000-2001 timeframe, many CAM and EDA vendors would have just ported their codebases to Win32/DirectX, instead of sticking with POSIX/GLX (doing ports from Irix/Solaris to Linux) thanx to nVidia at least having a quality Linux 3D/GLX implementation that was usable for engineering. When there is no viable "open source" option, I'll take "open standard, proprietary source" on Linux versus "proprietary standard, proprietary source" on Windows that would make it extremely difficult for the code to _ever_ return to POSIX/GLX (and making the applications Windows only). ]
duffmckagan wrote:
On 8/5/05, Shawn M. Jones smj@littleprojects.org wrote:
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
<SNIP> Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm <SNIP> If the general, or even a significant minority, consensus is that my posts are indeed too off-topic, I'll go back to lurking and helping off- list. I have no problem with that, and do it all-the-time.
Hi folks,
Other lists use the 'OT' prefix to indicate that a subject has gone 'off topic'. Some of you have done this, and it's great. This assists in searching and sorting of list information as well as allowing email filters to remove the OT posts for those who don't wish to see them. Sometimes I like to read the OT posts, sometimes I just delete them in one swell foop.
Why don't we use this concept for this CentOS list? I've noticed that some of you have been doing so, but if we make it a mailing list rule, then we have the benefit of a) OT posters and those interested in their posts can still post, and b) those who don't wish to read OT posts can delete or filter as they see fit.
It is the responsibility of the originator of the OT discussion (no matter what the original thread may have been) to realize that he/she is going OT.
--Shawn
LOL. Like this? Is it OK?
Ja, that's the idea.
--Shawn
"duffmckagan"
is that your real name?
:-P
Shawn M. Jones wrote:
duffmckagan wrote:
On 8/5/05, Shawn M. Jones smj@littleprojects.org wrote:
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
<SNIP> Now I don't deny I've gone off-topic, and I'm trying to curb that. I'm <SNIP> If the general, or even a significant minority, consensus is that my posts are indeed too off-topic, I'll go back to lurking and helping off- list. I have no problem with that, and do it all-the-time.
Hi folks,
Other lists use the 'OT' prefix to indicate that a subject has gone 'off topic'. Some of you have done this, and it's great. This assists in searching and sorting of list information as well as allowing email filters to remove the OT posts for those who don't wish to see them. Sometimes I like to read the OT posts, sometimes I just delete them in one swell foop.
Why don't we use this concept for this CentOS list? I've noticed that some of you have been doing so, but if we make it a mailing list rule, then we have the benefit of a) OT posters and those interested in their posts can still post, and b) those who don't wish to read OT posts can delete or filter as they see fit.
It is the responsibility of the originator of the OT discussion (no matter what the original thread may have been) to realize that he/she is going OT.
--Shawn
LOL. Like this? Is it OK?
Ja, that's the idea.
--Shawn _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On Fri, 2005-08-05 at 13:16 +0000, duffmckagan wrote:
On 8/5/05, Shawn M. Jones smj@littleprojects.org wrote:
<SNIP>
Hi folks,
Other lists use the 'OT' prefix to indicate that a subject has gone 'off topic'. Some of you have done this, and it's great. This assists in searching and sorting of list information as well as allowing email filters to remove the OT posts for those who don't wish to see them. Sometimes I like to read the OT posts, sometimes I just delete them in one swell foop.
<SNIP>
--Shawn
LOL. Like this? Is it OK?
Seems perfect to me :-D
Paul
On 8/2/05, Ted Kaczmarek tedkaz@optonline.net wrote:
What relevance to Centos 4.1 does this have?
Maybe nothing, but I for one find the material brief, interesting, and useful. Go back to sleep.
-
Aleksandar Milivojevic -
Alexander Dalloz -
Bryan J. Smith -
Collins Richey -
David Evennou (Data Masters) -
duffmckagan -
Greg Knaddison -
Hilliard, Jay -
Mark Frank -
Matt Hyclak -
Mike Kercher -
Paul -
Peter Farrow -
Phil Schaffner -
Shawn M. Jones -
Sudev Barar -
Ted Kaczmarek