LSTOWN-L Archives

LISTSERV List Owners' Forum

LSTOWN-L

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mark Hunnibell <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 22 Jun 1999 10:23:48 -0400
text/plain (47 lines)
Hello:

I would like to know the answer to something before I try it.  We
currently have a list with weekly archives. The main reason for the
weekly archives is that 80% of our users participate in the list using
the web archive interface and the individual message volume can be
rather high, so we try to keep the current 'table of contents' page to
a reasonable size by using the weekly archive.

However, after a month or two, it seems less important to have the
weekly archives and they actually interfere with someone who is trying
to read an older thread (linking from message to message on the same
subject) that spanned several weeks.  Also, our web archive 'home
page' is getting rather long.

We're running LISTSERV on NT and what I'd like to do is contatenate
the older (more than two months old) weekly LOG files into monthly log
files using a simple 'DOS' command series like:

TYPE LISTNAME.LOG9901A > TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901
TYPE LISTNAME.LOG9901B >> TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901
TYPE LISTNAME.LOG9901C >> TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901
TYPE LISTNAME.LOG9901D >> TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901
TYPE LISTNAME.LOG9901E >> TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901
DELE LISTNAME.LOG9901*
MOVE TEMP/LISTNAME.LOG9901 LISTNAME.LOG9901

My questions about this are these:

1. After doing the above, do have to do anything to LISTSERV to tell
it these new LOG files are in the LISTNAME INDEX and the old LOG files
are not?

2. Similar question about the WA.EXE program: What do I have to do to
get the /archives/LISTNAME.HTML page rebuilt using the month-based LOG
files?

Our archives prior to 1998 are already in month-based LOG files and
they function normally in the same directory as week-based LOG files
for the same list, so I know that's not going to be a problem.

Are there any problems in doing the above that I have not considered?

Thanks,

Mark Hunnibell

ATOM RSS1 RSS2