On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >> time and am now testposting
--D.
And responding to my own post.
--D.
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >> time and am now testposting
--D.
And responding to my own post.
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th time and am now testposting
--D.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:52:00 -0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by David Greig
<[email protected]>:
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:All seems to work; thanks for the effort! :-)
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying
shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl
shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>>> time and am now testposting
--D.
And responding to my own post.
--D.
And testing something else
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>> time and am now testposting
--D.
And responding to my own post.
--D.
And testing something else
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:52:00 -0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by David Greig
<[email protected]>:
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:All seems to work; thanks for the effort! :-)
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>>> time and am now testposting
And responding to my own post.
And testing something else
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >time and am now testposting
--D.
Bob Casanova wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:52:00 -0000 (UTC), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by David Greig
<[email protected]>:
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:All seems to work; thanks for the effort! :-)
On 2023-08-16, David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying
shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl >>>>> shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th
time and am now testposting
And responding to my own post.
And testing something else
What he said ;)
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >time and am now testposting
--D.
Pedantically, it was down for over three days.
But thanks to you,
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
T.O. may require DIG's attention. The last post to T.O. was over 12
hours ago.
On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 12:40:05 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th
time and am now testposting
To give DIG the benefit of the doubt, he may have only noticed the problem a day before he posted this.--D.
Pedantically, it was down for over three days.Yes, and I think it is good for folks to know that we talked about it in sci.bio.paleontology
almost the whole time, and some of what we wrote.
In particular, anyone reading this might benefit from knowing that s.b.p. is completely
independent of Beagle.
But thanks to you,Except that we'll be just as frustrated as we were since late August 13
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
if Beagle goes down again and DIG doesn't try to change his habits.
I wrote about one way he might change them on the s.b.p. thread I mentioned just now.
_____________________ repost ____________________________
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:06:50 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
T.O. may require DIG's attention. The last post to T.O. was over 12
hours ago.
Thanks for setting this thread up, jillery. It gave us in the USA early advance
warning (1:06 am, EDT). As of now, the downtime is past the 27 hour mark.
I have often recommended to DIG that he use sci.bio.paleontology to
let us know that he is aware that Beagle is down and to give us
periodic updates [one a day is enough, IMO] on how soon he expects
it to be back up.
Alas, the last time I got any feedback from DIG was early in 2011.
In particular, he seems oblivious to these recommendations.
Peter Nyikos
###################################### end of post
archived at https://groups.google.com/g/sci.bio.paleontology/c/LMJxcNgxcNg/m/lWYGHVQCBAAJ
Re: ATTN: Those with a direct line to DIG
Aug 14, 2023, 4:05:14 PM
In past downtimes lasting this long, s.b.p. served as a kind of "talk.origins in exile."
This time, only one talk.origins regular took full advantage of that status to start a new thread there:
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.bio.paleontology/c/eNHv_1Ig3L8
It was a good one, and partly *not* OT by the fact that sci.bio.evolution died of boredom
about a decade ago. The new thread got a pair of scientifically based additions.
Peter NyikosThe fact that DIG doesn't pay any attention to you reveals a wisdom many of us lack.
On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 12:40:05 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David Greig
<[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying
shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl
shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>> time and am now testposting
--D.
To give DIG the benefit of the doubt, he may have only noticed the
problem a day before he posted this.
Pedantically, it was down for over three days.
Yes, and I think it is good for folks to know that we talked about it in sci.bio.paleontology
almost the whole time, and some of what we wrote.
In particular, anyone reading this might benefit from knowing that s.b.p. is completely
independent of Beagle.
But thanks to you,
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
Except that we'll be just as frustrated as we were since late August 13
if Beagle goes down again and DIG doesn't try to change his habits.
I wrote about one way he might change them on the s.b.p. thread I mentioned just now.
_____________________ repost ____________________________
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:06:50 AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
T.O. may require DIG's attention. The last post to T.O. was over 12
hours ago.
Thanks for setting this thread up, jillery. It gave us in the USA early advance
warning (1:06 am, EDT). As of now, the downtime is past the 27 hour mark.
I have often recommended to DIG that he use sci.bio.paleontology to
let us know that he is aware that Beagle is down and to give us
periodic updates [one a day is enough, IMO] on how soon he expects
it to be back up.
Alas, the last time I got any feedback from DIG was early in 2011.
In particular, he seems oblivious to these recommendations.
Except that we'll be just as frustrated as we were since late August 13
if Beagle goes down again and DIG doesn't try to change his habits.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David Greig <[email protected]> wrote:On the third day, it was ... risen?
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >> time and am now testposting
Pedantically, it was down for over three days. But thanks to you,
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
jillery wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David GreigOn the third day, it was ... risen?
<[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>> time and am now testposting
Pedantically, it was down for over three days. But thanks to you,
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 12:40:05?AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:That he still maintains the thing at all is a blessing. You�re pushing it a >bit.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:43:44 -0000 (UTC), David Greig
<[email protected]> wrote:
I lock innd from being upgraded automatically and some underlying
shared library was updated, which broke the now-old innd binary (perl
shlib actually, lol)
So I unlocked it now, recompiled innd, re-chmod-4755'd inews for the N+1th >>>> time and am now testposting
--D.
To give DIG the benefit of the doubt, he may have only noticed the
problem a day before he posted this.
Pedantically, it was down for over three days.
Yes, and I think it is good for folks to know that we talked about it in
sci.bio.paleontology
almost the whole time, and some of what we wrote.
In particular, anyone reading this might benefit from knowing that s.b.p. is completely
independent of Beagle.
But thanks to you,
we're up and running again, so it's water over the dam.
Except that we'll be just as frustrated as we were since late August 13
if Beagle goes down again and DIG doesn't try to change his habits.
I wrote about one way he might change them on the s.b.p. thread I mentioned just now.
_____________________ repost ____________________________
On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:06:50?AM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
T.O. may require DIG's attention. The last post to T.O. was over 12
hours ago.
Thanks for setting this thread up, jillery. It gave us in the USA early advance
warning (1:06 am, EDT). As of now, the downtime is past the 27 hour mark. >>
I have often recommended to DIG that he use sci.bio.paleontology to
let us know that he is aware that Beagle is down and to give us
periodic updates [one a day is enough, IMO] on how soon he expects
it to be back up.
Alas, the last time I got any feedback from DIG was early in 2011.
In particular, he seems oblivious to these recommendations.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 00:57:20 |
| Calls: | 12,098 |
| Calls today: | 6 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,860 |