rbbr is looking for a rbbr/config.rb module which is non-existent…
(not in the tarball)
[waisun@caspar waisun]$ rbbr
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui/gtk.rb:26:in require': No such file to load -- rbbr/config (LoadError) from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui/gtk.rb:26 from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui.rb:35:inrequire’
from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui.rb:35:in default' from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr.rb:20:inmain’
from /usr/bin/rbbr:21
rbbr is looking for a rbbr/config.rb module which is non-existent…
(not in the tarball)
[waisun@caspar waisun]$ rbbr
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui/gtk.rb:26:in require': No such file to load -- rbbr/config (LoadError) from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui/gtk.rb:26 from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui.rb:35:in require’
from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr/ui.rb:35:in default' from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rbbr.rb:20:in main’
from /usr/bin/rbbr:21
AFAIR, someone - most likely Dave - acknowledged this issue a while
back, and the ambient suggestion was to mangle email addresses of ML
participants on the way to the NG.
Dave suggested someone suggest something concrete or post some code,
and the issue then lost currency.
My memory on all this is fuzzy, BTW. Anyway, I suggest that you
examine the gateway code (it’s in The Ruby Way) and post a patch.
That might get the issue taken seriously again.
BTW, if you haven’t received acres of spam in your inbox yet, don’t
worry: you will
Cheers,
Gavin
···
On Monday, December 30, 2002, 11:21:08 PM, Wai-Sun wrote:
Since the mailing list is auto-gatewayed to c.l.r, all our email
addresses are also being displayed out in hostile Usenet, openly and
nakedly.
Are there any precautions taken by the gateway program (I guess not, as
I can see my email address in any newsreader), or any being planned?
Since the mailing list is auto-gatewayed to c.l.r, all our email
addresses are also being displayed out in hostile Usenet, openly and
nakedly.
Worse! It’s displayed on a web archive! And if people really want to
harvest email addresses, they can subscribe to the mailing list. Better
not post at all!
···
–
The Second Law of Thermodynamics:
If you think things are in a mess now, just wait!
Since the mailing list is auto-gatewayed to c.l.r, all our email
addresses are also being displayed out in hostile Usenet, openly and
nakedly.
Worse! It’s displayed on a web archive! And if people really want to
harvest email addresses, they can subscribe to the mailing list. Better
not post at all!
Worse! It’s displayed on a web archive! And if people really want to
harvest email addresses, they can subscribe to the mailing list. Better
not post at all!
Oops. So sorry, I didn’t mean to rehash (apparently) an old topic. I
just only realised it by pointing my newsreader to c.l.r.
Not at all, it deserves rehashing. Mailing lists are supposed to be
more sanitised than newsgroups, IMO. This issue is probably just
lingering in the too-hard basket.
It doesn’t really get under my skin enough; I’ve never put a NOSPAM
(or equivalent) in my “apparent” email address - I just cop the
consequences. And my spam-filtering is good enough now.
I may need to mangle my email address manually first…
Not a bad start!
Gavin
···
On Monday, December 30, 2002, 11:38:22 PM, Wai-Sun wrote:
That’s true, but these are not the most efficient avenues for
harvesting. It is appropriate to worry first about the Usenet angle.
This seemed plausable, but I did a survey of my incoming spam over the
past few days. 15 came directed to addresses that have only been used on
web pages, 35 to addresses I use for mailing list posts, and 3 to the
address I post to Usenet as. So I think the “Usenet is an evil harvesting
ground” meme is just a myth. It certainly used to be true, but I doubt it
is at the moment.
···
–
“Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about.”
– B. L. Whorf
Oops. So sorry, I didn’t mean to rehash (apparently) an old topic. I
just only realised it by pointing my newsreader to c.l.r.
Not at all, it deserves rehashing. Mailing lists are supposed to be
more sanitised than newsgroups, IMO. This issue is probably just
lingering in the too-hard basket.
The other ML issue (perhaps) is that posting is not restricted to subscribers, hence the sporadic spam that turns up. Much of it
is caught by filters befire reaching subscribers, though.
The other ML issue (perhaps) is that posting is not restricted to
subscribers,
hence the sporadic spam that turns up. Much of it
is caught by filters befire reaching subscribers, though.
Speaking of spam, I was surprised by the rejection of my email (which
contained some perl code and equivalent ruby code) on the grounds of it
being spam. I have included the response in its entire form below. I suspect
that even this email may get rejected by the ML (becuase the code is still
there ;-)).
Any way, if someone can guide me so that I won’t commit the same mistake
twice.
Thanks,
– shanko
···
Your mail is rejected for
avoid to distribute commands [#Perl Code:]
The other ML issue (perhaps) is that posting is not restricted to
subscribers,
hence the sporadic spam that turns up. Much of it
is caught by filters befire reaching subscribers, though.
Speaking of spam, I was surprised by the rejection of my email (which
contained some perl code and equivalent ruby code) on the grounds of it
being spam. I have included the response in its entire form below. I suspect
that even this email may get rejected by the ML (becuase the code is still
there ;-)).
Any way, if someone can guide me so that I won’t commit the same mistake
twice.
Thanks,
– shanko
Your mail is rejected for
avoid to distribute commands [#Perl Code:]