You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to modperl@perl.apache.org by Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com> on 2002/02/02 19:21:49 UTC
modperl growth
Hi,
I thought that some of you might find this graph interesting:
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200201/apachemods.html?mod=cGVybA==
For some reason, in December, it would seem that modperl just jumped ahead in
market share (from 13% to nearly 20%). So given that people here are
occasionally given to gloom and doom descriptions of the Perl/mod_perl world
("there aren't as many people as before", "the Java folks are taking over",
etc.) I'd like to take this growth as well as modperl's general well doing
(19.78% is a *huge* amount of people -- 600.000 servers, a "fifth of the
internet") as a very good sign that modperl is alive, kicking, and doing very
well. Kudos to all ;-)
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com> -- CTO
k n o w s c a p e : // venture knowledge agency www.knowscape.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are trivial truths and there are great Truths. The opposite of
a trival truth is obviously false. The opposite of a great Truth is
also true.
-- Niels Bohr
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
Mark Maunder <ma...@swiftcamel.com> writes:
> I was thinking that too, but then I remembered that if you're not from an IT
> background, you're probably not going to be able to write a line of mod_perl
> code anyhoo.
No, but you can pick up Mason, embperl, or Apache::Template (the TT
loaded into Apache).
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Mark Maunder <ma...@swiftcamel.com>.
Rod Butcher wrote:
> My .05... I run a small communal webserver. Software had to be free, secure,
> stable, support Perl, multiple domains and ASP, be reasonably simple,
> originally run on Win32 and be capable of migration to Linux later.
> Nobrainer -- Apache, mod_perl, Apache::ASP.
> Only difficulty was getting mod_perl installed, it helped that I had a
> background in IT, I suspect a non-professional would find it impossible.
> Which is a shame because Win$ users expect everything to work out of the box
> wihout having to know anything. That's not meant as a criticism, but I think
> it's the reality now.
I was thinking that too, but then I remembered that if you're not from an IT
background, you're probably not going to be able to write a line of mod_perl
code anyhoo.
But, yeah, the installation/compilation process is daunting for a
javascript/html jockey who is trying to pick which server side language (PHP,
Perl, Python, JSP, etc.) to learn.
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Rod Butcher <rb...@hyenainternet.com>.
My .05... I run a small communal webserver. Software had to be free, secure,
stable, support Perl, multiple domains and ASP, be reasonably simple,
originally run on Win32 and be capable of migration to Linux later.
Nobrainer -- Apache, mod_perl, Apache::ASP.
Only difficulty was getting mod_perl installed, it helped that I had a
background in IT, I suspect a non-professional would find it impossible.
Which is a shame because Win$ users expect everything to work out of the box
wihout having to know anything. That's not meant as a criticism, but I think
it's the reality now.
regards, Rod
===================================
The sender has never accepted any funding
from Enron. Any suggestion to that effect
will be met with legal action.
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
Dave Rolsky <au...@urth.org> writes:
> On 4 Feb 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
>
> > And if the Slashcode were as easy to install and customise as
> > phpnuke...
>
> For OSCON (and hopefully YAPC too), I've submitted a talk on using
> Module::Build (an ExtUtils::MakeMaker replacement) for modules and using
> it to build an application installer.
For slashcode, the HTML templating is a little hairy although
beutifully crafted and using Template Toolkit. It's just real hard to
find your way round the first time.
> I'm not sure how on-topic this is anymore, though I don't think creating a
> separate list would exactly help at this point.
I'm sure several mod_perl advocacy lists have spun out like a little
UFO in Conway's game of life and disappeared off the edge of the
screen already...
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: [OT] modperl growth (installers)
Posted by Dave Rolsky <au...@urth.org>.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Ed Grimm wrote:
> That's a good strategy (assuming a missing if in there somewhere). It
> can be augmented with the tactic of "check for a running apache, see
> where it gets its config file from, and parse the config file" to get
> the initial guess. (Note that I wouldn't want this to be a final guess;
> I'm using mod_perl in a virtual host config; the "main" apache config
> doesn't use it, and has a completely unrelated docroot
> (/usr/local/apache/htdocs as opposed to /home/appname/public_html))
Yep, been there, done that ;)
The installer I mentioned for WeBoard UX was really pretty smart. It
would look for the Apache binary (and ask if it couldn't find it), figure
out if it had mod_perl (and ask for a different one if that binary didn't
have mod_perl), check the Apache version, check the mod_perl version, find
that Apache binary's config file (and ask...), figure out what user &
group that Apache ran as (to change certain permissions), tweak the Apache
and config file to load WebBoard.
And that's just what it did for Apache. It did a lot of other
install/config tasks as well.
Hmm, I really feel that this has gotten quite off-topic. Maybe I should
create a "Perl installer" project on Sourceforge that'd attempt to take
these types of things and create various useful modules for them, like
Installer::Apache, Installer::Alzabo, Installer::RDBMS::MySQL, etc.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
we await the New Sun
==================*/
Re: [OT] RE: modperl growth
Posted by Ed Grimm <ed...@tgape.org>.
On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Andrew Ho wrote:
>
>> One last thing that is hard is where is your DocumentRoot? This is a huge
>> problem for web applications being installable "out of the box." Perl
>> can't necessarily figure that out by itself, either.
>
> You take a guess and then ask the user to confirm. And you can't guess
> you just ask.
That's a good strategy (assuming a missing if in there somewhere). It
can be augmented with the tactic of "check for a running apache, see
where it gets its config file from, and parse the config file" to get
the initial guess. (Note that I wouldn't want this to be a final guess;
I'm using mod_perl in a virtual host config; the "main" apache config
doesn't use it, and has a completely unrelated docroot
(/usr/local/apache/htdocs as opposed to /home/appname/public_html))
> There's nothing wrong with an interactive installer. What kills mod_perl
> apps is they simply have a README or INSTALL that says "Copy all the
> template files to a directory called 'app-root' under your document root."
"My what?" "Which files are templates?" "I don't know this unix stuff;
copy doesn't work right."
I think we've all probably heard these words before...
>> I guess my point is that installation is hard. Rather than trying to make
>> it work for everybody out of the box, you should make it work for the
>> typical case out of the box, and then provide hooks for installing it in
>> custom places.
>
> I think the best installer is an interactive installer that tries really
> hard to provide good defaults.
I agree; while I frequently leave unimportant considerations alone (note
my main docroot above), I tend to have very poor luck with the "works
with the typical case out of the box, and then provides hooks which
change with every bloo^W^W^W^W^Wfor installing it in custom places". I
won't go into speculations why.
Ed
Re: [OT] RE: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Rolsky <au...@urth.org>.
On Mon, 4 Feb 2002, Andrew Ho wrote:
> One last thing that is hard is where is your DocumentRoot? This is a huge
> problem for web applications being installable "out of the box." Perl
> can't necessarily figure that out by itself, either.
You take a guess and then ask the user to confirm. And you can't guess
you just ask.
There's nothing wrong with an interactive installer. What kills mod_perl
apps is they simply have a README or INSTALL that says "Copy all the
template files to a directory called 'app-root' under your document root."
> I guess my point is that installation is hard. Rather than trying to make
> it work for everybody out of the box, you should make it work for the
> typical case out of the box, and then provide hooks for installing it in
> custom places.
I think the best installer is an interactive installer that tries really
hard to provide good defaults.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
we await the New Sun
==================*/
Re: [OT] RE: modperl growth
Posted by Andrew Ho <an...@tellme.com>.
Hello,
JH>I've found it possible to dispense with a separate configuration file
JH>for almost any application, even those with an RDBMS back-end. Under
JH>*nix it's really easy to automate things, under Win32 it's a little more
JH>difficult (file permissions are a bastard to manipulate). Perl can
JH>analyse its own environment very accurately, and once it has this
JH>"awareness" it's really easy to achieve automation.
So you are right about this, but let me add a caveat. Many times you need
to cooperate with a third-party package management system. For example, an
RPM database, or a stow or encap repository. In the latter case especially
the paths that files are referenced at (typically /usr/local) differ from
the places they actually live (typically a mounted repository). (I believe
the Andrew File System has a similar problem, too.)
Stuff using GNU autoconf is pretty easy to work into this by specifying a
PREFIX at configure time. As of Perl 5.6.0 the Perl base install system
accomodates for this as well, allowing you to specify different stuff to
go into @INC versus where "make install" puts the package.
Perl modules aren't as nice to fix. They automatically want to go where
Perl is installed. If you want to rev packages separately, regular "make
install" doesn't do the right thing.
One last thing that is hard is where is your DocumentRoot? This is a huge
problem for web applications being installable "out of the box." Perl
can't necessarily figure that out by itself, either.
I guess my point is that installation is hard. Rather than trying to make
it work for everybody out of the box, you should make it work for the
typical case out of the box, and then provide hooks for installing it in
custom places.
Humbly,
Andrew
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Ho http://www.tellme.com/ andrew@tellme.com
Engineer info@tellme.com Voice 650-930-9062
Tellme Networks, Inc. 1-800-555-TELL Fax 650-930-9101
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[OT] RE: modperl growth
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
:: - Install Apache and mod_perl, or use an existing installation.
::
:: - Install all the needed modules, template files, images, etc.
[cut]
Dave,
I too try to automate installations as much as possible. Within Perl,
I've found it possible to dispense with a separate configuration file
for almost any application, even those with an RDBMS back-end. Under
*nix it's really easy to automate things, under Win32 it's a little more
difficult (file permissions are a bastard to manipulate). Perl can
analyse its own environment very accurately, and once it has this
"awareness" it's really easy to achieve automation. Anyone can do this,
but most of us are too lazy for such niceties, which is too our
detriment I think.
However, all of my work in this direction requires that Perl and any
required modules/libraries are already installed - I have never
attempted to do an "all-in-one" install, although I do see this as being
relatively easy to achieve.
I would love to contribute to any efforts towards an out-of-the-box
installer.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Co-ordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Rolsky <au...@urth.org>.
On 4 Feb 2002, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> And if the Slashcode were as easy to install and customise as
> phpnuke...
For OSCON (and hopefully YAPC too), I've submitted a talk on using
Module::Build (an ExtUtils::MakeMaker replacement) for modules and using
it to build an application installer.
Its not _that_ hard, and using Module::Build makes it a lot easier. When
Matt Sergeant and I were working on (formerly) O'Reilly's WebBoard for
Unix, we built an interactive command-line installer that could do the
following:
- Install Apache and mod_perl, or use an existing installation.
- Install all the needed modules, template files, images, etc.
- Set up a new database in your RDBMS of choice (MySQL, Postgres, Sybase,
or Oracle) though the Sybase and Oracle choices weren't 100% automated
(they are just too complex).
Nowadays, I'd use Alzabo, which can also intelligently handle upgrading
old versions of a schema (its not quite 100% perfect but its pretty
good).
- Insert various default values into your DB, if they weren't already
there.
At this point, you simply (re-)started your Apache w/mod_perl and you were
ready to go. You had an admin account you logged in with and could start
creating boards and such.
It was a lot of work but its not _that_ hard. Perl definitely needs more
"out of tarball/box/whatever" install-able apps and I'd like to help
people get there. Alzabo is pretty close, though it still requires you to
hand-modify your httpd.conf.
I'm not sure how on-topic this is anymore, though I don't think creating a
separate list would exactly help at this point.
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
we await the New Sun
==================*/
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
___cliff rayman___ <cl...@genwax.com> writes:
> one more guess - in the group of guesses. ;-)
>
> perhaps redhat or another popular distro is
> configuring standard with mod_perl (i use
> redhat, but i always hand select my packages).
> if this is the case, then the banner will show mod_perl,
> even if the user has no idea what it is, and it
> is not in use. the good news is, there is lots
> of mod_perl installed out there, so if more applications
> are created that use it, there is a bigger installed base
> capable of running them.
And if the Slashcode were as easy to install and customise as
phpnuke...
;-)
Hmmm....actually, there's half a point buried in there.
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: modperl growth
Posted by ___cliff rayman___ <cl...@genwax.com>.
one more guess - in the group of guesses. ;-)
perhaps redhat or another popular distro is
configuring standard with mod_perl (i use
redhat, but i always hand select my packages).
if this is the case, then the banner will show mod_perl,
even if the user has no idea what it is, and it
is not in use. the good news is, there is lots
of mod_perl installed out there, so if more applications
are created that use it, there is a bigger installed base
capable of running them.
cliff
Robin Berjon wrote:
> For some reason, in December, it would seem that modperl just jumped ahead in
> market share (from 13% to nearly 20%). So given that people here are
> occasionally given to gloom and doom descriptions of the Perl/mod_perl world
> ("there aren't as many people as before", "the Java folks are taking over",
> etc.) I'd like to take this growth as well as modperl's general well doing
> (19.78% is a *huge* amount of people -- 600.000 servers, a "fifth of the
> internet") as a very good sign that modperl is alive, kicking, and doing very
> well. Kudos to all ;-)
--
___cliff rayman___cliff@genwax.com___http://www.genwax.com/
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com>.
On Saturday 02 February 2002 23:20, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> Wow, bizarre. Not sure why but the AxKit list has seen a massive spurt in
> traffic lately too. Perhaps due to the migration to xml.apache.org (well,
> just a link at the moment), but perhaps due to the above?
Traffic is notoriously hard to predict. Maybe someone has just been asking a
lot of questions, which in turn has brought others to ask more questions, as
well as brought up subjects people had been wanting to investigate but had
forgotten to post about, etc.
> However I'm always skeptical of such massive changes - perhaps more likely
> is a change in SecuritySpace's methodology?
If that were the case it would affect other modules similarly. I went through
a number of other modules, notably PHP, and the Java ones and there is no
comparable change. The only other sharp increase was for mod_fastcgi, but it
was merely a jump from 2.5 to 3% or something like that, nothing really
comparable to the leap forward made by modperl.
--
_______________________________________________________________________
Robin Berjon <ro...@knowscape.com> -- CTO
k n o w s c a p e : // venture knowledge agency www.knowscape.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change is inevitable except from a vending machine.
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> writes:
> However I'm always skeptical of such massive changes - perhaps more likely
> is a change in SecuritySpace's methodology?
Don't Netcraft keep numbers?
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws> writes:
> At 11:02 +0000 2/3/02, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> >Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws> writes:
> >
> >> Mac OS X includes Apache, and mod_perl works there, too. That's
> >> another group of potential new mod_perl-ized servers.
> >
> >I think all the recent RedHats come with mod_perl as a DSO by default.
>
> I just looked on a RH 7.2 machine. It has the AddModule line in the
> default httpd.conf, but no mod_perl.so in the modules directory.
OK try:
ps wwaux | grep httpd
Does it have -DHAVE_PERL?
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Pierre Phaneuf <pp...@ludusdesign.com>.
Paul DuBois wrote:
> > I think all the recent RedHats come with mod_perl as a
> > DSO by default.
>
> I just looked on a RH 7.2 machine. It has the AddModule
> line in the default httpd.conf, but no mod_perl.so in the
> modules directory.
I think the DSO in a separate mod_perl RPM package.
--
Pierre Phaneuf
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws>.
At 11:02 +0000 2/3/02, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
>Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws> writes:
>
>> Mac OS X includes Apache, and mod_perl works there, too. That's
>> another group of potential new mod_perl-ized servers.
>
>I think all the recent RedHats come with mod_perl as a DSO by default.
I just looked on a RH 7.2 machine. It has the AddModule line in the
default httpd.conf, but no mod_perl.so in the modules directory.
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@davehodgkinson.com>.
Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws> writes:
> Mac OS X includes Apache, and mod_perl works there, too. That's
> another group of potential new mod_perl-ized servers.
I think all the recent RedHats come with mod_perl as a DSO by default.
--
Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Paul DuBois <pa...@dubois.ws>.
At 20:54 -0200 2/2/02, Jorge Godoy wrote:
>Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> writes:
>
>> Wow, bizarre. Not sure why but the AxKit list has seen a massive spurt in
>> traffic lately too. Perhaps due to the migration to xml.apache.org (well,
>> just a link at the moment), but perhaps due to the above?
>>
>> However I'm always skeptical of such massive changes - perhaps more likely
>> is a change in SecuritySpace's methodology?
>
>You have to remember of the latest attacks on IIS too... People are
>migrating from IIS to other web servers. Apache is a very good
>candidate to power these ex-IIS sites.
>
>Since the use of Apache has increased, people start looking after
>alternative technologies that use it. mod_perl, AxKit and other are
>these technologies.
>
>
>I don't think that this covers all those new servers, but it certainly
>covers a lot of them.
Mac OS X includes Apache, and mod_perl works there, too. That's
another group of potential new mod_perl-ized servers.
Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by Thomas Eibner <th...@stderr.net>.
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 10:21:32AM +1100, Rod Butcher wrote:
> Folks, please don't send attachments, esp. with no explanation, it looks
> just like these deliberate virus attacks to me and I refuse to open any
> attachments unless I am personally familiar with the sender and know they
> know what they're doing. If it's plain text please embed it in the email,
> else provide a URL where one can download the attachment from.
> Yeah, I know, use Linux, don't use Outlook Express, .txt attachments are
> unlikely to contain virus, use antvirus software etc.... been there, done
> that, I'm sticking to my story.
Outlook Express has no clue on what to do with PGP signed messages? Which
is what it was.
--
Thomas Eibner <http://thomas.eibner.dk/> DnsZone <http://dnszone.org/>
mod_pointer <http://stderr.net/mod_pointer> !(C)<http://copywrong.dk/>
Putting the HEST in .COM <http://www.hestdesign.com/>
Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by Drew Taylor <dr...@drewtaylor.com>.
At 01:27 AM 2/3/2002 -0200, Jorge Godoy wrote:
>"Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com> writes:
>
> > Guys, in light of recent messages, can you suggest a secure full-function
> > Win32 email reader (including optional HTML) with a brain that I can
> migrate
> > all my Outlook Express stuff to and so escape the Virus nightmare and deal
> > with PGP, GPG etc and hence use electronic communication the way it's meant
> > to be used ?
>
>I'm not a Windows user (thanks God!), but a friend of mine loves a
>program named 'The Bat!'. There's also 'Eudora' (I've used Eudore 6
>years ago...).
I've been a Eudora guy for more than a few years now. I think I started
with version 3, but I could be wrong. It's a great mailer, and now it
really is free if you want to watch their advertising. I don't have any
problem with it, but AdAware will tell you you're infected w/ spyware.
The best thing about Eudora is that it uses good old mbox format, so you
could later move to mutt once you're on unix. Oh, and it's stable and
immune to the Outlook viruses too. :-)
Drew
Drew Taylor JA[P|m_p|SQL]H
http://www.drewtaylor.com/ Just Another Perl|mod_perl|SQL Hacker
mailto:drew@drewtaylor.com *** God bless America! ***
Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by Mike808 <mi...@users.sourceforge.net>.
Some kind of off-the-cuff reviews from a friend you might find interesting.
Note the criterion: <$20 and HTML on/off
> I am using Vivian as my main client, but it is lacking in a few "functions"
> that need work. It is the ONLY client I have found so far that doesn't
> support HTML and it has a really nice "headers view" of the mail on the
> server that allows you to choose download, download/delete, delete
> before you POP it. It doesn't routinely check your mail for you though.
> I "registered" (It's freeware) and sent the guy a few bucks to encourage
> his development.
> So far, I'm putting my money on POCO as the closest competitor to OE (if
> you bar Messenger (I did for HTML reasons)). I have two more to
> look at, but so far, nothing promising. I started with two criterion money
> (had to be free or less than $20) and be able to turn off HTML/helper
> applications (no virus carriers). Mahogany might be promising when the windows
> version gets out of beta. So far, this is what I have done :
> Outlook Express, Messenger, Pegasus, Iris, PMMail, Mail Warrior, Vivian,
>
> Hmmm, roll your own with Sylpheed?
And what he had to say about The Bat:
> Yep, It was very complex. I've heard good and bad talk about it. The HTML
> features can't be controlled and the cost made it one of my "no" choices.
> I am currently on one of my "finds" and rather liking it. Take a look at
> QuickMail Pro. It was written for the MAC, but is rather nice for Doze.
> Pricey at $40, but maybe I need to look at some of these...
>
> (my Doze crashed earlier and I was forced to send before I included all of
> the different mail clients I have tried. Quite a few. If I could have
> gotten it to work correctly, I'd have stayed with Kaufman Mail Warrior
> (my first).
I hope that this points those looking in some directions at some of the
low-cost alternatives out there.
Mike808/
--
perl -le "$_='7284254074:0930970:H4012816';tr[0->][ BOPEN!SMUT];print"
RE: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
:: I think, as somebody said, that migrating to Outlook instead
:: of Outlook Express might be something (though you won't be
:: free from worms, virii, etc.).
There is a patch available from Microsoft which prohibits the opening of
certain types of attachments. This makes Outlook (not Outlook Express)
pretty secure. In any case, who opens attachments these days anyway?
It's all down to common sense surely. Use a good virus checker, keep it
up to date (I update my signature files daily), don't open unexpected
attachments and, if you use Outlook or Outlook Express, turn off the
Auto Preview feature - then you're pretty safe, regardless of the email
client you're using.
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Co-ordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by Jorge Godoy <go...@conectiva.com>.
"Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com> writes:
> Guys, in light of recent messages, can you suggest a secure full-function
> Win32 email reader (including optional HTML) with a brain that I can migrate
> all my Outlook Express stuff to and so escape the Virus nightmare and deal
> with PGP, GPG etc and hence use electronic communication the way it's meant
> to be used ?
I'm not a Windows user (thanks God!), but a friend of mine loves a
program named 'The Bat!'. There's also 'Eudora' (I've used Eudore 6
years ago...).
I think, as somebody said, that migrating to Outlook instead of
Outlook Express might be something (though you won't be free from
worms, virii, etc.).
See you,
--
Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
[OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by Rod Butcher <rb...@hyenainternet.com>.
Guys, in light of recent messages, can you suggest a secure full-function
Win32 email reader (including optional HTML) with a brain that I can migrate
all my Outlook Express stuff to and so escape the Virus nightmare and deal
with PGP, GPG etc and hence use electronic communication the way it's meant
to be used ?
many thanks, Rod
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jorge Godoy" <go...@conectiva.com>
To: "Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com>
Cc: <mo...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
>>>clip clip...
> I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
>
> Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've bought it
> from Microsoft, I think you should send them a request for them to
> implement OpenPGP standards in their mail reader.
>
>
> Unfortunately, you (don't) get what you paid for...
>
>
> See you,
> --
> Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
>
> Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
> Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by "Erich L. Markert" <em...@netscape.net>.
Why not just use Netscape's mail client then? Works on Unix, Linux,
Win32, etc...
rbutch@hyenainternet.com wrote:
>Thanks to folks who contributed, Eudora seems the thing to go with here.
>What I'd really like is a Win32 version of KDE Mail, so I can have
>cross-platform standardization.
>regards, Rod
>===================================
>The sender has never accepted any funding
>from Enron. Any suggestion to that effect
>will be met with legal action.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Todd Finney" <tf...@boygenius.com>
>To: "Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com>
>Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:27 AM
>Subject: Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
>
>
>>I've used various versions of Eudora since around 1995. It's not
>>perfect, but it's better than most. Recent versions have fairly
>>powerful filtering capabilities, and it handles large mailboxes without
>>difficultly (how large? My largest mailbox has around 35,000 messages
>>in it, it's been higher).
>>
>>It also has nice functional keyboard shortcuts, so you don't need to
>>use a mouse when you're handling mail.
>>
>>I can't comment on using PGP with it, as I've never tried that. I
>>can't imagine it being a problem, though.
>>
>>cheers,
>>Todd
>>
>>
>>At 09:11 PM 2/2/02, Rod Butcher wrote:
>>
>>>Guys, in light of recent messages, can you suggest a secure
>>>full-function
>>>Win32 email reader (including optional HTML) with a brain that I can
>>>migrate
>>>all my Outlook Express stuff to and so escape the Virus nightmare and
>>>deal
>>>with PGP, GPG etc and hence use electronic communication the way it's
>>>meant
>>>to be used ?
>>>many thanks, Rod
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Jorge Godoy" <go...@conectiva.com>
>>>To: "Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com>
>>>Cc: <mo...@apache.org>
>>>Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 12:24 PM
>>>Subject: Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>clip clip...
>>>>>>
>>>>I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
>>>>
>>>>Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've bought
>>>>
>>>it
>>>
>>>>from Microsoft, I think you should send them a request for them to
>>>>implement OpenPGP standards in their mail reader.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Unfortunately, you (don't) get what you paid for...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>See you,
>>>>--
>>>>Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
>>>>
>>>>Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
>>>>Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
>>>>
>
>
Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
Posted by Rod Butcher <rb...@hyenainternet.com>.
Thanks to folks who contributed, Eudora seems the thing to go with here.
What I'd really like is a Win32 version of KDE Mail, so I can have
cross-platform standardization.
regards, Rod
===================================
The sender has never accepted any funding
from Enron. Any suggestion to that effect
will be met with legal action.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Todd Finney" <tf...@boygenius.com>
To: "Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] email attachments - Win32 email reader to replace OE
> I've used various versions of Eudora since around 1995. It's not
> perfect, but it's better than most. Recent versions have fairly
> powerful filtering capabilities, and it handles large mailboxes without
> difficultly (how large? My largest mailbox has around 35,000 messages
> in it, it's been higher).
>
> It also has nice functional keyboard shortcuts, so you don't need to
> use a mouse when you're handling mail.
>
> I can't comment on using PGP with it, as I've never tried that. I
> can't imagine it being a problem, though.
>
> cheers,
> Todd
>
>
> At 09:11 PM 2/2/02, Rod Butcher wrote:
> >Guys, in light of recent messages, can you suggest a secure
> >full-function
> >Win32 email reader (including optional HTML) with a brain that I can
> >migrate
> >all my Outlook Express stuff to and so escape the Virus nightmare and
> >deal
> >with PGP, GPG etc and hence use electronic communication the way it's
> >meant
> >to be used ?
> >many thanks, Rod
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jorge Godoy" <go...@conectiva.com>
> >To: "Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com>
> >Cc: <mo...@apache.org>
> >Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 12:24 PM
> >Subject: Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
> >
> >
> > >>>clip clip...
> > > I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
> > >
> > > Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've bought
> > it
> > > from Microsoft, I think you should send them a request for them to
> > > implement OpenPGP standards in their mail reader.
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, you (don't) get what you paid for...
> > >
> > >
> > > See you,
> > > --
> > > Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
> > >
> > > Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
> > > Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
> >
>
RE: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by stevea <st...@nwtechops.com>.
Since Balmer and Gates consider open anything to be a "threat to corporate
intellectual property" it's not likely that they will do this. If you ask
nicely, though, they will steal it and call it ActivePGP - then sell it back
to you.
>>"Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com> writes:
>>I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
>>Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've bought it
>>from Microsoft, I think you should send them a request for them to
>>implement OpenPGP standards in their mail reader.
>>Unfortunately, you (don't) get what you paid for...
Re: [OT] email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by Jeremy Howard <jh...@fastmail.fm>.
Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
> Er, that's not strictly true. Outlook handles encrypted and/or signed
> email as well as any other client. Outlook displays the signed email
> with a unique icon to identify it as such. The attachment contains the
> actual PGP info (in case you want to see it). I think that's fair
> enough isn't it?
>
> I don't know about Outlook Express though (which is a completely
> different mailer).
>
Outlook Express handles S/MIME, but OpenPGP multipart/signed messages
confuse it.
RE: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by "Brett W. McCoy" <bm...@chapelperilous.net>.
On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Jonathan M. Hollin wrote:
> Er, that's not strictly true. Outlook handles encrypted and/or signed
> email as well as any other client. Outlook displays the signed email
> with a unique icon to identify it as such. The attachment contains the
> actual PGP info (in case you want to see it). I think that's fair
> enough isn't it?
To be fair, it showed up as an attachment in Pine under Linux also
(although identified as a PGP signature).
-- Brett
http://www.chapelperilous.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You will pay for your sins. If you have already paid, please disregard
this message.
RE: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by "Jonathan M. Hollin" <ne...@digital-word.com>.
:: I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
::
:: Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've
:: bought it from Microsoft, I think you should send them a
:: request for them to implement OpenPGP standards in their
:: mail reader.
Er, that's not strictly true. Outlook handles encrypted and/or signed
email as well as any other client. Outlook displays the signed email
with a unique icon to identify it as such. The attachment contains the
actual PGP info (in case you want to see it). I think that's fair
enough isn't it?
I don't know about Outlook Express though (which is a completely
different mailer).
Jonathan M. Hollin - WYPUG Co-ordinator
West Yorkshire Perl User Group
http://wypug.pm.org/
Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by Jorge Godoy <go...@conectiva.com>.
"Rod Butcher" <rb...@hyenainternet.com> writes:
> Folks, please don't send attachments, esp. with no explanation, it looks
> just like these deliberate virus attacks to me and I refuse to open any
> attachments unless I am personally familiar with the sender and know they
> know what they're doing. If it's plain text please embed it in the email,
> else provide a URL where one can download the attachment from.
> Yeah, I know, use Linux, don't use Outlook Express, .txt attachments are
> unlikely to contain virus, use antvirus software etc.... been there, done
> that, I'm sticking to my story.
> thanks & regards, Rod
I'm sorry, but it was a GPG (a free PGP) signed message.
Outlook is really lost when it sees that and, since you've bought it
from Microsoft, I think you should send them a request for them to
implement OpenPGP standards in their mail reader.
Unfortunately, you (don't) get what you paid for...
See you,
--
Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
Re: email attachments; was modperl growth
Posted by Rod Butcher <rb...@hyenainternet.com>.
Folks, please don't send attachments, esp. with no explanation, it looks
just like these deliberate virus attacks to me and I refuse to open any
attachments unless I am personally familiar with the sender and know they
know what they're doing. If it's plain text please embed it in the email,
else provide a URL where one can download the attachment from.
Yeah, I know, use Linux, don't use Outlook Express, .txt attachments are
unlikely to contain virus, use antvirus software etc.... been there, done
that, I'm sticking to my story.
thanks & regards, Rod
===================================
The sender has never accepted any funding
from Enron. Any suggestion to that effect
will be met with legal action.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jorge Godoy" <go...@conectiva.com>
To: "Matt Sergeant" <ma...@sergeant.org>
Cc: "Robin Berjon" <ro...@knowscape.com>; <mo...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: modperl growth
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Jorge Godoy <go...@conectiva.com>.
Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org> writes:
> Wow, bizarre. Not sure why but the AxKit list has seen a massive spurt in
> traffic lately too. Perhaps due to the migration to xml.apache.org (well,
> just a link at the moment), but perhaps due to the above?
>
> However I'm always skeptical of such massive changes - perhaps more likely
> is a change in SecuritySpace's methodology?
You have to remember of the latest attacks on IIS too... People are
migrating from IIS to other web servers. Apache is a very good
candidate to power these ex-IIS sites.
Since the use of Apache has increased, people start looking after
alternative technologies that use it. mod_perl, AxKit and other are
these technologies.
I don't think that this covers all those new servers, but it certainly
covers a lot of them.
Be seeing you,
--
Godoy. <go...@conectiva.com>
Escritório de Projetos -- Conectiva S.A.
Projects Office -- Conectiva Inc.
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org>.
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I thought that some of you might find this graph interesting:
>
> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200201/apachemods.html?mod=cGVybA==
>
> For some reason, in December, it would seem that modperl just jumped ahead in
> market share (from 13% to nearly 20%). So given that people here are
> occasionally given to gloom and doom descriptions of the Perl/mod_perl world
> ("there aren't as many people as before", "the Java folks are taking over",
> etc.) I'd like to take this growth as well as modperl's general well doing
> (19.78% is a *huge* amount of people -- 600.000 servers, a "fifth of the
> internet") as a very good sign that modperl is alive, kicking, and doing very
> well. Kudos to all ;-)
Wow, bizarre. Not sure why but the AxKit list has seen a massive spurt in
traffic lately too. Perhaps due to the migration to xml.apache.org (well,
just a link at the moment), but perhaps due to the above?
However I'm always skeptical of such massive changes - perhaps more likely
is a change in SecuritySpace's methodology?
--
<!-- Matt -->
<:->Get a smart net</:->
Re: modperl growth
Posted by Ask Bjoern Hansen <as...@valueclick.com>.
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Robin Berjon wrote:
> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.200201/apachemods.html?mod=cGVybA==
>
> For some reason, in December, it would seem that modperl just jumped ahead in
> market share (from 13% to nearly 20%). [...]
At least on Netcraft big jumps are usually explained by a big
hosting provider or a "domain name parking service" changing
servers.
13% to 20% does seem odd though.
--
ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
more than a billion impressions per week, http://valueclick.com