On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 02:30:51PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:43:50 +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote > > On Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 05:56:42PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > > > I just noticed that a number of archived mails from the lm_sensors > > > mailing-list have their email addresses non-scrambled. Examples: > > > http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg18608.html > > > http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg18529.html > > > http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg18510.html > > > > > > Care to take a look and fix the problem? > > > > Umm, I've taken a look, and unfortunately, I cannot see why this is the > > case. I haven't changed the email address obfuscation option of > > mhonarc, and messages either side of the ones above have been > > obfuscated fine. > > That's not what I see here. > > All messages from 9531 to 18623 are not obsucated. > > Also note that message 9531+N seems to be the same as message N, except that > it's not obfuscated. This explains why the archive suddenly claims to have > over 18000 messages while it was around 9000 not that long ago. > > > I cannot see anything out of the ordinary in these > > messages that would make them not get obfuscated. > > > > If I think of anything else, I'll let you know. If you could keep an > > eye on it and make sure it doesn't start missing a sizable amount of > > messages > > (preferably no more) or you can find a pattern in the messages it is > > missing, let me know. > > I don't think the messages have anything special. I would rather suspect the > reinstall of the host system some times ago. Does the date September 10 2004 > means anything special to you as far as this system is concerned? This is when > the duplicates seem to have been generated. > > The most simple thing to do now would probably be to delete all these duplicates. Okay, I've unleashed carnage upon the archive, but there are no more duplicates, and what is linked from the index page appears to be obfuscated. The downside is, there's been a lot of message renumbering. I believe there's probably a couple of sets of messages floating around on the filesystem, but I'll leave that alone in the interests of not breaking links all over the place. e.g. msg00000.html == msg18899.html Sorry for the mess. Thanks for taking the time to do some research, I'm rather busy myself and wouldn't have had time to do it. regards Andrew -- linux.conf.au 2005 - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Birthplace of Tux April 18th to 23rd - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - LINUX Canberra, Australia - http://lca2005.linux.org.au/ - Get bitten!
