LFS 6.4 now boots

DJ Lucas dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Jun 1 05:44:34 PDT 2009


Nicolas FRANCOIS wrote:
> Le Sun, 31 May 2009 20:43:34 -0400 Jaiyson <SNIP> a
> écrit :

<SNIP>

>I think the best thing to do for me now is point
> srikanth tiyyagura <SNIP> to your thread !
> 
> \bye
> 


Nico, just a heads up about netequitte.  This is for everyone else's 
benefit as well, and this really isn't a huge deal now days, but when 
posting replies to a public list, you should try to avoid posting the 
original sender's address in the body of the message.  And you should 
never post anyone's email address without permission, and *never* on a 
publicly available mailing list!  Posting somebody's email address in 
plain text on the web makes it extremely easy for spammers to harvest 
addresses.  I think the LFS list software is configured to obfuscate 
addresses automatically for the archives, by replacing the string '@' 
with the string '_at_' but not everyone does this with their list setup, 
nor is this terribly effective now days.

For people who do not host their own mail, this really is not a huge 
deal, but for those who do, it can be troublesome.  Just to give you an 
idea, I have really tight spam filtering on my server.  I'd imagine that 
there are at least a few false positives every week, so some mail I'm 
just not getting, but the trouble of making filtering light without the 
letting in too much spam is not worth the couple of FPs every week.  I 
usually receive about 3-4 spam messages every week.  Grepping my mail 
logs, on my address alone, I've stopped 2763 messages at the door and 
another 422 had to be processed by Spam Assassin over the past 7 
days...and SA is a big memory resource.  Simple actions, like not 
posting a raw email address to an online forum, helps all mail admins 
and users alike, to reduce the amount of junk that they have to deal 
with.  Please keep this in mind in the future.

Thanks in advance.

-- DJ Lucas




More information about the lfs-support mailing list