On 2017 Aug 11 18:24:08, you wrote to All:
AL> I have discovered an issue that can manifest itself when archived
AL> segments are submitted to the next *C up the chain. When archiving
AL> the new segment prior to submission, MakeNL doesn't check to see if
AL> the archive already exists. The result is submission of an archive
AL> containing the new segment, as well as an older one.
i saw that on my system the other week... i figured it was simply because i had
it keeping so many old segments... as i needed some more drive space, i just
killed them off since they were old and out of date...
where i saw it was in my "master" directory (which is set via master as well as
outpath) in the z?? archives... i think janis ran into it some time back,
too... i have some here now that have up to three in them... the problem stems
from using just the last two numbers of the extension... there can only be 100
z?? files x00 through x99 and then the numbers start repeating again and thus
the archive extensions...
where i'm seeing this is actually at the zone level in the nodelist archives
that it creates... that ctl file also has "threshold -1 -1" in it... as this is
a testing zone, it isn't a big thing here but it is something that probably
should be taken care... the region and net segments being created here for this
testing zone do not compress anything or i'm sure i would be seeing it with
them, too... i'm not sure why the zone level is even creating z?? archive files
for distribution with "threshold -1 -1" unless it is something forced from
"make composite" or the existance of "arccopy" and "arcmove" statements... the
two test nets don't even have arccopy or arcmove defined... the region and zone
do but the region is not creating z?? files whereas the zone is... hummm...
AL> There are two solutions that I've come up with:
AL> 1. MakeNL check for an existing archive and remove it prior to archiving
AL> the segment for submission. 2. When uncompressing incoming segment
AL> archives, compare file dates on all files unpacked and use the most
recent.
AL> What do you think? I'm leaning towards number 2 first, as that will help
AL> in cases where the lower level *C hasn't upgraded his version of MakeNL
AL> yet.
i tend to lean toward #2 as well with the addition of deleting the other old
files that came in that archive, too... no since in trashing up someone else's
system with old garbage files... hopefully when they were extracted, they
didn't overwrite any that they might have had retained... but i guess that
depends on where you extract the files to before starting to work with them...
AL> As a work around, the problem can be avoided by disabling the
AL> compression of submitted segments by adding:
AL> THReshold -1 -1
AL> to your control file.
in this day in time, that might be a good thing to have as a default... fidonet
really doesn't need to compress things like it once did, does it?
)\/(ark
Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it
wrong...
... Oh No, no, Nurse. I said remove his SPECTACLES!
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
|
