HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:18:36 +0100
From:         Eric Thomas <ERIC@SEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: REXX Error (invalid whole number) listserv Distribute
              11 Nov 1992 09:06:39 EST from "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7"
              <LSTSRV-L@SEARN>

This used to happen each and every time a new PEERS NAMES was sent out at
some sites with a broken XEDIT, or  a broken ESTATE, or whatever. In 1.7d
I stopped using XEDIT for rebuilding the PEERS tables, partly in order to
bypass this problem, and it stopped occurring.  I guess there is a way to
get the same  result even with 1.7d  if you have a power  failure just at
the right time, but I have no time to fix that.

  Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:29:27 +0100
From:         Eric Thomas <ERIC@SEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: linking to a conf. system (loopcheck?)
              11 Nov 1992 17:46:47 GMT from "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7"
              <LSTSRV-L@SEARN>

On  Wed, 11  Nov 1992  17:46:47 GMT  TIMO HARMO  <harmo@VALT.HELSINKI.FI>
said:

>I  have a  list that  is linked  to a  rather fuzzy  conferencing system
>("portacom") and I am having some problems with it.

Commiserations. I didn't know we actually *exported* that thing.

>Listserv  send  the  messages  it  has received  to  the  conference  in
>portacom, which sends the message back to the list.

That is the  problem. Portacom cannot act as a  LISTSERV peer, period. It
is foolish to even try. The solution is to get rid of portacom :-)

>The listserv-documents that I have do not say anything about "LOOPCHECK"
>-header.

That is the keyword you would use  to tell LISTSERV to accept the message
and start a nice mailing loop instead  of sending an error message to the
poster. I don't think you want to try ;-) A better solution is to get rid
of portacom.

>P.S To be able to put in effect  the good advice I hope to get from this
>list, I need one more advice: can I somehow add new owners or update the
>list header via mail?

Yes, 'GET listname (HEADER'.

>The conferencing system locked up  when it received it's welcome-message
>from listserv, apparently  (so says the sys adm) because  in the TO-line
>there vere several different variations of my e-mail address,

Solution: get  rid of portacom  :-) You should  ask your system  admin to
register the machine's  Internet node in the BITEARN  NODES file, though,
so that  LISTSERV can  recognize your Internet  address as  equivalent to
your BITNET address.

  Eric
From: SYSSHASH@UKCC.UKY.EDU (Sathaye, Shashi)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: forward package and listserv 1.7e
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:44:17 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: lstsrv-m@searn.BITNET

I installed one from listserv@searn and my problems with 1.7e went away.
The one I had was dated 1990..
Thanks to all who helped.
From: RIEHL@USCVM.BITNET (john riehl)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: recurring message
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:03:52 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

I keep on getting this mail on a weekly basis.  I have issued the
command, but it has no effect.  I will get the same message a week later
whether I issue the command or not.

A checksum  error has  been detected  on GLOBLIST FILE  for the  local node
information. No automatic action has been attempted lest a loop be started.
You may wish  to issue a LSVLDELT REFRESH LISTSERV@USCVM  command to try to
correct the problem.

any ideas?  I think that this may have started shortly after going to
1.7d.

jr
(john riehl)
(183 days and counting)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Fri, 13 Nov 1992 12:53:24 CST
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Adam Floro <CA1225@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU>
Subject:      Disappearing FAC's in LISTSERV FILELIST

From:  Adam Floro

When we use LSVPUT to put up an updated LISTSERV FILELIST, and then
subsequently TELL LISTSERV INDEX, our new FAC's we've setup for 2 new
lists are not showing up in LISTSERV FILELIST even though they are
in the copy we are LSVPUTting over to LISTSERV.

Anybody have any ideas as to what we are doing wrong???  Thanks.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adam Floro                                Bitnet:  CA1225@SIUCVMB
Systems Programmer                      Internet:  CA1225@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU
Southern Illinois University                  IP:  CA1225@131.230.1.2
Carbondale, IL 62901                       Voice:  (618) 453-6238
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:53:38 +0100
From:         Eric Thomas <ERIC@SEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: recurring message
              5 Nov 1992 14:03:52 PST from "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7"
              <LSTSRV-L@SEARN>

This is not  a new problem, there  are a handful of sites  affected but I
cannot  reproduce it  locally  and, due  to the  complexity  of the  code
involved, I cannot diagnose it just by looking at the source code.

  Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: SCOTH@WMVM1.CC.WM.EDU (Scott Hammer)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: Mail from root
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:38:03 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: "Forum on LISTSERV Release 1.7" <lstsrv-l@uga.BITNET>,
              Listserv Maintainer's Discussion <lstsrv-m@searn.BITNET>

Is there any way to allow mail from "root" at a particular node as
a legal address for submitting to a particular list without disabling
loop checking altogether?  I see in the release notes for 1.7b the
introduction of "Loopcheck=NoOrigin," but that seems less granular
than what I want.

My situation is this.  We have a list that is used for posting bug reports,
fixes, etc. for our unix systems around campus.  The person who posts most
often is the Engineer responsible for these systems -- unfortunately, he
is most often logged on a root, and posts from there, and LISTSERV rejects
the mail.  I'd like him to be able to post to this one list, without
turning off the other checking that LISTSERV does.

Is this possible?

-Scott Hammer
 VM Systems Engineer
 College of William and Mary
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 09:06:39 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: REXX Error (invalid whole number) listserv Distribute

Any clues as to why the following occurred (I've searched the lstown-l
and lstsrv-l notebook archives -- a similar problem was reported on
lstown-l in February: appended at bottom)

Thanks.

/Pete Weiss

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

Date:          10 Nov 1992 14:02:27 +0000
From:          Revised List Processor <LISTSERV%UTKVM1.BITNET@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU
   > (1.7d)
Subject:       Output of job "TQM-L" from LISTSERV@UKCC
To:            ENDACOTT@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu

A REXX error (Invalid whole number) occured while processing your command.
Part of the  command output might have been lost.  LISTSERV management has
been notified.
An error occured while processing your file "TQM-L MAILDIST" (ID=9227):

  REXX error occured - job execution not allowed to continue.

Your file has been transferred to POSTMAST@UTKVM1.
_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+

Date:         Thu, 13 Feb 1992 13:18:49 PST
Reply-To:     ListServ list owners <LSTOWN-L@INDYCMS.BITNET>
Comments:     Resent-From: Patricia Parker <SYSPPA@LLUVM>
Comments:     Originally-From: Revised List Processor (1.7a)
              <LISTSERV@LLUVM.BITNET>
From:         "Patricia Parker" <SYSPPA@LLUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Message

I've been getting REXX errors since about noon yesterday. I *swear* I
didn't change any software. Could someone please help me out?

First REXX error in console log follows. I get several REXX errors.

12 Feb 1992 22:22:05 Processing file (2071) from LISTSERV@USCVM
12 Feb 1992 22:22:06 From LISTSERV@USCVM: DIST2 FROM=LISTSERV@PCCVM I=Y FORW(CRC
) HOST(190) TO LISTSERV LLUVM
   106 +++  Do i = 9 for d.0-8
DMSREX466E Error 26 running LSVDIST2 EXEC, line 106: Invalid whole number

Message from LISTSERV:

A  REXX error  occured while  processing the  following command  from
LISTSERV@USCVM: "DIST2 FROM=DD=From I=Y FORW(CRC) HOST(190) TO UBNHBE
LLUVM". See console log for more details.

Patricia Parker
Loma Linda University
Organization: University of Califonia San Francisco
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:29:32 PST
From:         Yossie Silverman <YOSSIE@UCSFVM.UCSF.EDU>
Subject:      automatic filelist for archives

Is there currently a way to make LISTSERV generate an automatic FILELIST
for the archived notebook's (separate, monthly, weekly, etc..)?

I would like to make my GOPHER access the archives of a list.  To do so
the GOPHER requires a FILELIST of the files in the archive.  Best of all
would be if the 4-n words of each line in this filelist were the subject
line from the archived mail in the given file (obviously this works best
with separate archiving :-)

So, whatcha all think?  Is it doable today?  In the future?  - Yossie

---
Yossie Silverman                   "What did the Caspian Sea?" - Saki
I'Net:  yossie@ucsfvm.ucsf.edu
Bitnet: YOSSIE@UCSFVM              B5/4 f- w- t cd g++ k++ s++ p
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Slippery Rock University - Computer Center
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:24:10 EST
From:         Fran Hensler <FJH@SRU.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Undoing the LSVPUNCH format?

On Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:13:44 CST Jonathon Simon said:
>Is there an object program already on LISTSERV that will undo an LSVPUNCH
>formatted file, or do we need to create one (using Pascal or "C") like
>the info in LISTLPUN MEMO says?  A faculty user received an email file in the
>LPUN format and wants us (the computing center) to "fix" it.

My READLPUN EXEC will do what you want.  I'm sending it separately.

Another option is to send a request to the LISTSERV to resend the file
in NETDATA format.

Francis J. Hensler, CDP                     BITNET: FJH@SRU
Software Support Specialist                 Phone: (412) 738-2033
Slippery Rock University Computer Center    PANET:     8-654-2033
Slippery Rock, PA  16057-1326  USA   "Yes, Virginia, there is a Slippery Rock"
From: ERIC@SEARN.BITNET (Eric Thomas)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: Problem with 1.7e and old versions of FORWARD PACKAGE
Date: 12 Nov 92 15:31:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments: To: Revised LISTSERV Maintainers <LSTSRV-M@SEARN.BITNET>

The  FORWARD package,  like all  other optional  LISTSERV packages,  uses
internal LISTSERV routines and is  updated regularly along with LISTSERV.
It is not included in the  LISTSERV update shipments since most people do
not  run it  and those  who do  usually want  the ability  to make  local
changes to  support local mail systems  and the like, which  would not be
possible if the EXEC's were automatically replaced with new versions.

This, however,  does not mean that  the 1988 version of  the program will
work forever.  As it stands,  "old" versions of  the package do  not work
with release 1.7e (it  would take too much testing time  to find out what
is the exact minimum version to run  under 1.7e). The 1.7d version of the
package, which is  the one currently available  from LISTSERV@SEARN, does
work without problem. There is an  improved version for 1.7e (with better
performance) which will be made available within a week or two, when most
people have installed 1.7e. If you  are not running the 1.7d version, you
may  be  affected   and  you  should  install  the   LSV$FORW  EXEC  from
LISTSERV@SEARN as soon as possible.

  Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:14:56 EST
From:         "Duane D. Weaver" <WEAVER@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Mail containing mail headers of same list
Comments: To: listownl <lstown-l@indycms.BITNET>

One of my list owners would like to know is there a way to include the
entire mail file with mail headers of the same list, such that LISTSERV
will not complain about it.   The example below is the mail headers
from the same list, that was included in mail back to the list.  The
mail headers were prefixed with a > followed by a blank, by the
sender.


> Received: (from KSUVM.KSU.EDU for <EDTECH@OHSTVMA.BITNET> via BSMTP)
> Received: (from MAILER@KSUVM for MAILER@UOKMVSA via NJE)
>  (UCLA/Mail V1.410 M-RSCS4707-4707-32); Thu, 29 Oct 92 12:34:53 CST
> Received: by KSUVM (Mailer R2.07) id 1503; Thu, 29 Oct 92 12:35:49 CST
> Date:         Thu, 29 Oct 1992 13:27:53 EST
> Reply-To:     "EDTECH - Educational Technology" <EDTECH@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
> Sender:       "EDTECH - Educational Technology" <EDTECH@OHSTVMA.BITNET>
> From:         Mark Peterson <peterson@UHUNIX.BITNET>
> Subject:      FTPing HyperCard Stacks
> To:           Beth Williams The University of Oklahoma <DJ6583>,
>               Simon Hsu The University of Oklahoma <DL5583>,
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:26:49 EST
From:         Harold Pritchett <HAROLD@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mail from root
              12 Nov 1992 15:38:03 EST from <SCOTH@WMVM1.CC.WM.EDU>

On Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:38:03 EST Scott Hammer said:
>Is there any way to allow mail from "root" at a particular node as
>a legal address for submitting to a particular list without disabling
>loop checking altogether?  I see in the release notes for 1.7b the
>introduction of "Loopcheck=NoOrigin," but that seems less granular
>than what I want.
>
>My situation is this.  We have a list that is used for posting bug reports,
>fixes, etc. for our unix systems around campus.  The person who posts most
>often is the Engineer responsible for these systems -- unfortunately, he
>is most often logged on a root, and posts from there, and LISTSERV rejects
>the mail.  I'd like him to be able to post to this one list, without
>turning off the other checking that LISTSERV does.
>
>Is this possible?

Not the way the code is currently structured.  I have what we consider to
be a better solution.  No one should ever log on as root, except to
do installations of new releases of the O/S.  We create IDs for the people
doing system maintenance with userindex 0 and group index 1, but not root.

The password file entries looks something like this:

root:##root:0:1:Operator:/:/bin/csh
droot:##droot:0:1:David root:/home/sys/david:/bin/csh
hroot:##hroot:0:1:Harold root:/home/sys/harold:/bin/csh
vroot:##vroot:0:1:Victor root:/home/sys/victor:/bin/csh

Now, each person has their own personal root account.  Everything you can do
from root, you can do from here, with accounting of who did it.  Mail sent by
one of these accounts appears to be from the account shown, and not from
root, with the gcos field information properly put in the From: header.

Works for us.

Harold

Harold C Pritchett         |   BITNET:  HAROLD@UGA
BITNET TechRep             | Internet:  harold@uga.cc.uga.edu
The University of Georgia  |         :  harold@groucho.dev.uga.edu
Athens, GA 30602           |     fido:  1:370/60
(706) 542-3135             |      Bbs:  SYSOP at (706) 354-0817
           Note:  New Area Code - Formerly (404)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Resent-Organization: Central Michigan University
Resent-Subject: Missing routine in LSV$GETQ
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:47:59 EST
Comments:     Resent-From: David Jelinek <34AAQ77@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Comments:     Originally-From: Revised List Processor (1.7d)
              <LISTSERV@CMUVM.BITNET>
From:         David Jelinek <34AAQ77@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Subject:      Missing routine in LSV$GETQ

We run a pretty vanilla LISTSERV here (only have the OWNAME exit added).
I started getting the following message today. I have fixed the problem
by adding LSVNAD as a local function that calls LSVADM. It works fine.
My question is, shouldn't someone else have run into this? I can't
imagine what I might have done locally to lose this routine. Thanks in
advance.


David Jelinek                   BITNET:   34AAQ77@CMUVM
Systems Programmer
Central Michigan University     INTERNET: 34AAQ77@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu
NAD & Tech Rep for CMU
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
A  REXX  error occured  while  processing  the following  command  from
YS1771@ALBNYVMS: "send foodwine.log9210". See enclosed traceback and/or
console log for more details.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    88 +++      If LSVNAD(origin)
    78 +++   Call Sorry 'too much data today (more than' maxgetk'Kb, counting th
e file you are trying to order). You may try again in' When()'.','NADOK'
DMSREX478E Error 43 running LSV$GETQ EXEC, line 88: Routine not found
   233 +++        Call LSV$GETQ origin totf totk #blocks fn ft filelist,giveto,g
etquser
   189 +++     Call Do_Send xfn xft xfm,'NOERASE'
   151 +++  Call Send_Normalfile
DMSREX475E Error 40 running LSVGET EXEC, line 233: Incorrect call to routine
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: TECHGJS@TSCVM.BITNET (George Shedlock Jr.)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Subject: Files left in reader after upgrade to 1.7d
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:29:16 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

I have recently (last night) upgraded our listserv to 1.7d. I now have
about 400 files in the LISTSERV reader in hold status. Did I miss
something in the install?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:15:12 PST
From:         john riehl <RIEHL@USCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Files left in reader after upgrade to 1.7d

On Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:29:16 EDT George Shedlock Jr. said:
>I have recently (last night) upgraded our listserv to 1.7d. I now have
>about 400 files in the LISTSERV reader in hold status. Did I miss
>something in the install?

this was sloved with the fixes for listserv 1.7d.  You will need to install
them.  There is a file called LFIX memo, which i think is distributed as
part of listserv (or i may have stored mine there a long time ago and
just forgotten about it).  You can take a look at the fixlist, but i am
pretty sure you want the 17d-003o fix.

Until you put the fix on, you will have to change the jobs to nohold during
a non-prime time period.

jr
(john riehl)

"Everyone needs something to believe in.  I believe I'll have another drink"
  -- M. Wuts.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:31:09 +0100
From:         Eric Thomas <ERIC@SEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Please ignore the first set of release notes

I inadvertently posted  an incomplete set of release notes  which after a
certain point are  the same as the  1.7d notes. I started  editing on one
account, moved the  file to another one and then  used the wrong filemode
when sending it.  The correct version ends with a  description of LB64.C.
Sorry about the confusion.

  Eric
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 09:47:44 EST
From:         "Sathaye, Shashi" <SYSSHASH@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      listserv 1.7e
Comments: To: lstsrv-m@bitnet.BITNET

We got updated to 1.7e this morning and out 'forward' command stopped
working.
It dies with
Fixed-point divide exception occurred at 0074798E in system routine RXLSVREC;
Can some one help?
Usually eric is very helpful but he is not answering.. maybe busy.
I have not made any change to the LSV$FORW exec.
Forwarding is important to us. All VEEP's have their mail forwarded.
Thanks in advance.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:03:53 EST
From:         Ed Fair <CCUSEEF@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU>
Subject:      merging vm/sp systems

greetings listservers.  before i ask this question let me apologize
for the length of my posting - this may be obscure or a FAQ - i am "new".

we are attempting to merge our two vm/sp systems into one and are
investigating the effect this will have our our listserv subscribers.

we plan to merge the two systems GITVM1 and GTRI01 into one system
which will retain the name GITVM1.

both of these systems are currently internet hosts, although neither has
a ":internet." tag registered in BITEARN NODES.  the (soon to be)
extinct system is NJE NODEID GTRI01, internet GTRI01.GATECH.EDU;
the target system is NJE NODEID GITVM1, internet GITVM1.GATECH.EDU and
VM1.GATECH.EDU. the software involved is Rice Mail, MAILER, TCP/IP for VM, and
PROFS V2 w/PROFS extended mail.

our MAILER, RSCS, and SMTP software will allow us to accept incoming
mail addressed to any of the seven possible addresses and deliver it
to the virtual reader of the recipient.  (i.e. "x at gtri01",
"x at gitvm1", "x@gtri01.bitnet", "x@gitvm1.bitnet", "x@gtri01.gatech.edu",
"x@gitvm1.gatech.edu" and "x@vm1.gatech.edu").

the question remains, though, how x can un-subscribe, post or get files
if the original subscription was from one of the gtri01 addresses,
while the unsubscribe, post, or get is coming from one of the three
"vm1" addresses.

i have read eric's posting of 92/07/17 regarding listserv 1.7d support
for the :newnode and :oldnode tags and am convinced that this will
offer at least some relief (thanks for adding this, btw) but am unsure
about the completeness of this solution.  what if we do the following?

 :node.gtri01 :internet.gtri01.gatech.edu :newnode.gitvm1
 :node.gitvm1 :internet.gitvm1.gatech.edu vm1.gatech.edu :oldnode.gtri01

what are the considerations for the timing of these changes?

thank you for the consideration...!
ed
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.lstsrv-l
Date:         Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:40:50 EST
From:         Ed Fair <CCUSEEF@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: merging vm/sp systems
Comments: To: "Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7" <LSTSRV-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>
              13 Nov 1992 00:34:27 +0100 from <ERIC%SEARN.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>

thanks, eric.  you didn't mention anything about how to time the merger
with the update distribution.  would you advise making the BITEARN NODES
change before or simultaneous with the merge?  what would happen if
i made your recommended BITEARN NODES change and then had to leave
the two nodes unmerged for a few days/weeks?

ed