> 2006/12/26, Hal Keen <[log in to unmask]>:
> > Easiest low-tech way to do this is to concatenate the subscribers from
> > REVIEW ALL output of both lists, hand-snipping out everything else, and
dump
> > the whole thing into a sort. The MS-DOS interface, or "Command Prompt"
> > accessory on Windows, has a sort built in.
>
> And then use the Windows equivalent of uniq -d.

Alas! I don't know of one, which means the next step would be reading
through the whole list, looking for duplicates. But uniq -d would fail to
catch the very likely case in which the same address is subscribed to both
lists, but the name given was different. And, of course, if the person
(identifiable by name) is subscribed to both lists but with different
addresses, they might not be spotted at all.

Looks like programming is seriously better, all around. It should be
possible to write something that catches anyone who is subscribed to both
lists, with either the same name OR the same address. Again, Perl is the
obvious choice, if you've got it.

I have had two different subscribers who happened to have the same name.
Don't know any obvious way to distinguish such a case, except happening to
know the subscribers. But any LISTSERV-based solution, which is what Doug
was originally hoping for, would almost certainly only recognize
subscriptions using the same address.

Hal