On Wed, 15 Sep 1993 02:36:50 EDT you said:
>Actually, what it *really* means is usually some OTHER node popped out
>a DISTRIBUTE job that referenced server 56 (or whatever), and the
>originating node is the one who needs to update.
>
>If you're curious where 'server 56' used to be, look in PEERS NAMES on
>the LISTSERV 191 - Eric leaves 'comment' entries in when a Listserv is
>removed...
>
>To verify you found the offending Listserv, send it a 'release'
>command and see what date its PEERS NAMES is.  Then send a 'backbone'
>listserv a 'release' command.  If the dates dont match, somebody is
>backleveled and should be encouraged to update.
>
>                                  Valdis Kletnieks
>                                  Computer Systems Engineer
>                                  Virginia Polytechnic Institute
Thank you.
We are 'the backbone' listserv and we are not 'backdated'. The file came
from ulkyvm (distribute job) and they are at the same level.
But both dates (Sept. 13, 1993) are after I sent the query.
(so I am hoping that problem will not show again).
On a differnt topic : if we cannot afford to pay for the current
version would we still be 'backbone' server?
If we are supporting 'public' lists to which many people outside ukcc.uky.edu
subscribe, what impact they will have if we decided to keep out 1.7f version
and not bother to pay for the updates?
We definitely are poor this year. - we had budget cuts and have no funds to
pay for anything really... I have informed our management about the fees etc.
but we are state supported university and I have very little hope of getting
any money this year.