On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 08:20:04 +1100 James Hale said:
>Given the problem with the version of LISTSERV I am running and
>yearly archives, I decided to change the config file to use monthly
>archives (they work.)
>
>I thought changing the config file would do this.
>
>No.
>
>The web interface still doesn't pick up the existence of the archive.

You have to also rename it so that it has a monthly archive-type name,
ie, log0001 instead of log00 .  The nature of the bug is that if LISTSERV
sees a file that has an extension ending in "00", it doesn't consider it
an archive file.  That's why this is a parsing error rather than a true
Y2K error (it has nothing to do with dates at all, but rather with how
LISTSERV reads the file names out of the directory and decides what type
of file is represented).

>Looking at the "How to edit" archives docs, it mentions that doing a
>search will get LISTSERV to reindex the archive. However, these are
>new lists. The Yearly log is not registered as being present
>(although it is) and thus there is no search option available.
>
>Should I edit change the name of the yearly log to reflect what it
>would be if it were a monthly log?

Yep, as noted.  However see below.

>Should I send a test post to kick in that the log has changed?

No, there should be no need to do that.  The next regular posting or
search will suffice.

>I have four lists that are now operational and do not want to
>unnecessarily interrupt them.
>
>It has also been mentioned that this particular y2k bug was long documented.
>Anyone know where?

Yes, in the archives of either (or both) this list and LSTSRV-L.  We've
known about it since the first week of the year.  The fact of the matter
is that if you need a fix, you can look in the /listserv/beta-1.8d directory
on FTP.LSOFT.COM and if your OS platform is represented there, you can
go ahead and download the fix.  (These aren't betas; to avoid confusion
until we have all of the platform kits finished we are storing the fixed
release kits in that directory.)

Nathan