NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/comp/os/linux/15974

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-08 | 7.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!ogicse!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!uw-coco!quick!victrola!vince
From: [e-mail] (Vince Skahan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: uucp/mail/news FAQ [long]
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:19:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: victrola.1992Nov6.211944.449
References: <1992Nov2.071450.6622@loft> <[e-mail]>     <1992Nov4.080547.1063@loft> <[e-mail]> <1992Nov5.055437.3898@loft>
Organization: Vince and Suzie's Underpowered PC
Lines: 145

rak@loft (Robert Kiesling) writes:
>... Installing -- and using -- news software does not end with typing
>"make."

it certainly doesn't...

>Installing SLS or MCC, for example, is also intended (I assume) to be
>easy as possible.  I still see lots of postings from people who have
>questions.

I think the major difference is that SLS/MCC are basically static
distributions of "a mess 'o goodies" where mailpak/newspak are more
along the lines of "this is a pain to assemble and get to compile.
Here's a mess 'o .tar.Z files you can use with some confidence that
they will work as is, but they almost definitely need local customizations
to do things like setting domain names, etc. to reach a final config".

I'm of the opinion that news+elm really need to be done from the
sources because of how integrated they are and how configurable they
are.  I don't need (or want) to know all the gcc flags to be able
to compile something.  I'd *better* understand the flow of the various
C-news pieces (newsrun, sendbatches, etc.) to expect to get news to
flow and to integrate with uucp and mail.

uucp and smail are more os-like and *can* be distributed reliably
in binary-only in things like SLS and MCC.

For example, I don't run 'mailpak' as distributed by Ed.  My paths are
different.  I run 'domainized headers' for mail (Ed uses bang-path).
My domain is different than his....etc. I build it from his sources
from edited config files.

I think uucp and smail CAN be distributed in binary-only since you
can override the compiled-in options in the config files.  I don't
think you can come up with a universal Elm and C-news and Tin and Trn
and NN binary distribution because the local hostname and/or domain are
generally compiled in.

>>   A person getting started running news gets news/mail fed from
>>   somewhere.  If they have no clue, and they don't try to get a clue, they
>>   live with the implications of their lack of action.

>And so do other Linux activists.  The "Usenet is not for kiddies"
>sentiment is usually stated in reference to MS-LOSS or Mac people.  It
>would be great if Linux activists can avoid that.

I didn't mean any group in particular other than 'people who think they
want to be USENET admins who don't know it's not trivial to get set up'.

(if you do it right, it IS trivial to support after that part's done.
I've had C-news up for 10 months at work and I *never* even have to look
at it to make sure it's ok...same under Linux)

I'm trying *not* to be taking the attitude the "I'm telling you everything
you know, but not everything *I* know", but I just don't see the value in
re-documenting stuff that is just plain already done in many places
elsewhere.

>>                            Everybody is a
>>   beginner once.  Everybody screws up.  No biggie. If a rookie admin
>>   doesn't get in touch with his uucp neighbor(s) to help prevent him from
>>   screwing up BIG deserves what he/she gets.

>I did lean heavily on my uucp neighbors (thanks, Dave and Marc).  Both
>are non-pc architecture machines.  Anyway, it's easy for a rookie admin to
>edit their Systems file, type "postnews" and send stuff out into the
>world with no idea where it's going -- a no-brainer.

the thought that there are USENET admins out there editing stuff and
feeding folks with no idea how the mechanisms work terrifies me.
That's how you get re-broadcast storms like the ones that seem to
come from Fidonet every couple months.

I see it all the time.  I'm in a domain at work.  Admins say 'hey, I work
there too.  I'll call my system A.company.com' even though they aren't
that system name.  Mail bounces from here to Guam as a result.

With 12,000 plus sites in the UUCP maps and who knows how many not registered
or Internet-via-nntp only, the potential impact of a minor screwup is definitely
not minor.

>>   I strongly disagree about the need to document something in general
>>   in a comp.os.linux group. You must disagree, cool. Have fun.

>No real disagreement, IMHO.  Just a matter of how to do this.  Would
>you consider including one or two of these many docs in newspak?

I'll probably include a list of which ones I think every news admin
should get, read, and understand.  I'll also tell how to get them via
mail-server from the news.answers archives at pit-manager.mit.edu

I have no inclination to include actual FAQs in newspak.  Its intent is
to have a set of Linux-ized .tar.Z files of sources of many news programs.

It's intent is also to have a separate .tar.Z file containing ONLY patches,
config files, readme files, and porting guides for the various programs
so that if you have access to the sources (but can't quite get them to
work), you can download one small .tar.Z file with working config files
you can use to get SOMETHING running, then you can tweak it to taste.

It seems to me that an alarming percentage of tsx, sunsite, etc. disk space
is taken by .tar.Z files of stuff that doesn't require patches, just tweaked
config files.  Linux is getting so 'normal unix' [...oxymoron? :-) ...]
that the need for complete Linux-ized sources for normal unix sources is
rapidly disappearing.  the only thing I'd like to keep seeing complete
sources for is the kernel, truly Linux-specific ports of stuff, and maybe
whole-source-kits of major distributions like SLS and mcc-interim.

For example, the total newspak1.1 (newspak1.0 + nn6.4.16.tar.Z) that I'm
assembling here consists of about 3.5 MB of .tar.Z files.  The .tar.Z file
containing just the how-to-get-it-to-compile for all the pieces
(cnews+trn+tin+nn+smail3.1.28) is only 46KB.  Quite a difference.

you have newspak's trn2.2 and you want 2.3?  Cool.  Grab the 2.2->2.3 patch
from trn's author and apply it.  Then read the README.linux file to show
where the tweaks are needed.  Then type make.

Long term, I'd like to not have to upload massive .tar.Z files of stuff you
can get just as easily from ftp.uu.net or wherever like you can do from
tsx-11.mit.edu, sunsite, etc.  People need to learn how to use 'archie'
to find the dozens of sites that have the stuff you want.  People need to
read the 'how to find sources' FAQ from news.answers.

For now, I'll probably do at least the following:

    - patch up tin/trn/nn to current patchlevels (I'm one behind)

    - add a .tar.Z file with ALL my news+mail+uucp config files as
        a reference only with what works here. Your mileage may vary.

    - include a short list of FAQs people need to grab via anon-ftp
        or mailserver from the net (and a quickie description of
        how to go about it).

I'm also in conversation with Peter MacDonald regarding getting newspak
included in a future SLS. I haven't grabbed the SLS 'guide to adding stuff'
file so I can't draw any conclusions yet regarding whether that'll happen
yet.

(if anybody thinks a binary-only newspak *IS* possible, please drop me a
line via mail...)

--
     ---------- Vince Skahan --------- [e-mail] ----------
    Running Linux/C-news/trn/Elm/Smail - we don't need no steenkin' MS-DOS