On 12/27/2006 09:33, Nathan Brindle wrote:
> 
> Depending on how granular you want your report to be, it may not even be 
 > necessary to look inside the files.  If it's sufficient to know that the
 > last post was in, i.e., March 2004, then the file names will usually be
 > enough.
> 
> That falls through if you have single or yearly archives of course.

It also falls through for lists which are configured with no archives, because
there are no files to search.

> Another option would be to run a search command that returns only the last 
 > post.  For example the command
> 
> search * in lstsrv-l.last1
>

This command relies on the presence of list archives, so it, too, falls through
for lists which are configured with no archives.

The earlier suggestion to mine this information from the system-wide changelog
should cover these cases, assuming, of course, that the system-wide changelog is
enabled, the lists have been used since it was enabled, and the changelog files
are archived for posterity.

-- 
Paul Russell, Senior Systems Administrator
OIT Messaging Services Team
University of Notre Dame
[log in to unmask]