Re: [SLE] Empty Trash

From: Carlos E. R. (robin1.listas_at_tiscali.es)
Date: 11/10/04

  • Next message: Carlos E. R.: "Re: [SLE] 9.1 sshd how do I start it???" 
    Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:08:10 +0100 (CET)
To: SLE <suse-linux-e@suse.com>

    The Monday 2004-11-08 at 18:22 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:

    > > I don't care much about the backbone, I do care about the last mile,
    > > because that it is my bottleneck ;-)
    >
    > Really? The quantity of data received on the SuSE-Linux-E list is a
    > significant proportion of your link's capacity? You must be on one damn
    > slow link!

    Yes, it is. It can cope, of course, but if everybody in this list were
    using html, my ISP inbox would fill up easily: some have 3 Mb, some 25Mb.
    I could not take a few days out, because it would fill up quite soon.

    A quick calculation is below.

    > > I know that, you do not need to post them. Notice that some of those
    > > headers were added by your own machine, by the way.
    >
    > OK. I guess it's "only" 1700+ bytes...

    But it doesn't go up.

    About 80% of the list is over 3000 bytes, 10% is over 5Kb, and only a few
    are over 20Kb. Those 20Kb, minus 2 is 18. Plus 200% for the html part,
    thats 36. Total 36+18+2=56Kb (meaning around 10 second for each to
    download). Those of 5Kb would increase to about 11Kb.

    For example, last Monday I got 298 emails from this list alone: assuming
    4Kb each, thats around 1.2 Mbytes; including a html part, it would
    increase to 2.4Mb per day. That means that it would fill up in 3 or 4 days
    for the average 10 Mbytes account - with this list alone.

    > > And, you should not forget that there are many people - me, for
    > > example - using plain text programs. Pine can show some html, but not
    > > all. Some X clients do not handle html well, or not at all. Even if
    > > we are on the 21th century, that is a fact.
    >
    > That's another part of the point. Using antiquated software is _not_ a
    > reason to resist using a richer medium of communication. Not when it's
    > supported by bona fide standards.

    Yes, it is.

    It would force us to use certain kind of email clients.

    >
    >
    > > Thus, the list is designed for the minimun common denominator.
    >
    > Which is silly, but nonetheless is a value judgement on the part of the
    > list administrator. We should keep in mind, too, that with a change in
    > proprietorship for SuSE as a whole, all these things are potentially
    > subject to change. Perhaps Novell is more enlightened than the old SuSE
    > folks. After all, isn't Germany part of "Old Europe?" (Sorry, I
    > couldn't resist... I hate Bush at least as much as any fundie hates the
    > devil, by the way.)

    Then it would be the time to quit the list and SuSE :-|

    >
    > > > And again, I'm advocating styled text only, not full-blown HTML
    > > > mail, though I find that quite useful at times, too. I'll only view
    > > > such mail from known and trusted senders, of course.
    > >
    > > But I only complain about html mail, not styled mail - however, I
    > > have never seen such a thing. And the original poster used html.
    >
    > Barely. But still the point applies. Electronic mail is simply one means
    > of communication. If HTML, with its embedded style, layout and images,
    > is a useful medium for communication--and I think we all agree it
    > is--then why should it be excluded from electronic mail?

    Not from electronic mail, but from this list. That's what we are
    complaining about. There is no real need for it, there are technical
    reasons against it, and so are the rules of this list.

    I simply don't care, here, about what other lists do, or other users do
    with their private email.

    > > Hey, you just said "I'll only view such mail from known and trusted
    > > senders". What about the list? Do you trust everybody on it? Because
    > > the issue here is using html on the list.
    >
    > Is it? My issue is styled text, not HTML.

    But ours is html in the list. The original poster email used html.

    > > ¡But it doesn't exist! I wouldn't care much about the ability to say
    > > "this is bold" or whatever... In fact, perhaps I would like it. But
    > > there is no such standard, I think; for example, Pine knows nothing
    > > of such "styled text". There is only html, and to be polite it means
    > > sending both plain text and html, the second one been twice as big.
    > > A small mail is not much, but some reach 60Kbytes. I know, I get a
    > > few newsletters and such every day. It is not only "font style" they
    > > use, but boxes, charts, logos, and who knows what. 60Kb for a page or
    > > two. :-/
    >
    > (I wish English used the '¡')

    Oops! O:-)

    Writing in both languages means that they will get mixed now and then.
    Yes, I also think the opening mark is clearer, but... it is not my
    language, my opinion is not important :-)

    >
    > What doesn't exist? You're simply wrong, you know. There most certainly
    > is such a standard. Do you think I'd go on like this over a fantasy /
    > hallucination? <URL: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1896.html>. <URL:
    > http://mango.human.cornell.edu/kens/etf.html> is a nice explanatory
    > page.

    /usr/share/doc/rfc/rfc1896.txt.gz is nearer to me ;-)

    Ok, it does. What programs support it, in Linux?

    > I guess I was just spoiled by Eudora. It has long had support for RFC
    > 1523 and successors. Short of it's lack of threading, it's definitely
    > the best email client I've ever used. KMail is good, but it's not quite
    > as nice as Eudora...

    I think I have received emails from Eudora clients, and they were a pain
    to read in more than one email client. I don't know what is the situation
    now. 

    -- 
Cheers,
       Carlos Robinson
-- 
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
  • Next message: Carlos E. R.: "Re: [SLE] 9.1 sshd how do I start it???"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Why do people detest top posting so much?
      ... "tell" about me based on the fact that I posted in HTML? ... with Noberto's remark about people "from Outlook" feeling top-posting is ... defaulted for *top posting*. ... You just happened to rub a raw wound on the lists. ...
      (Ubuntu)
    • Re: [SLE] reply-to settings
      ... > single web browser or email client? ... > of one of the main lists used for support of its users. ... You would prefer that SuSE drop support for the list. ...
      (SuSE)
    • Re: Font specifications
      ... In most cases I readily agree to 'stop wanting that' but in this case ... among other things lists the fonts one has on their ... his options in HTML so he can ... "Is there a way to display these fonts directly from within an html ...
      (comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html)
    • A flexible multi-level UL/LI constructor
      ... fairly simple two-level HTML list but where conditional output depending on ... Sub heading 1.3 ... The above examples shows the basic UL/LI nesting which the Perl script needs ... an appropriate method to generate these type of menu lists? ...
      (comp.lang.perl.misc)
    • Re: HTML pages are faster then php?
      ... Lamp Lists wrote: ... as far as I know html page will download faster then the same page made with php getting the same info from mysql, ... let's pretend we are building php/mysq based website of one football team. ...
      (php.general)