LSTSRV-L Archives

LISTSERV Site Administrators' Forum

LSTSRV-L

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

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

Print Reply
Marc Stober <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 24 Aug 2000 17:12:03 -0400
text/plain (63 lines)
Garrie,

I'm not familiar with VM but it sounds like you are issuing the command to
the OS, instead of to ListServ. ListServ commands are usually issued by
sending e-mail containing the command to listserv@(domain name).

- Marc (A.B., Washington University, 1996) :)

= Marc Louis Stober
= Systems Manager
= The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
= [log in to unmask]
= http://www.uscj.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: LISTSERV give-and-take forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Garrie Burr
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2000 3:27 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: new distribution problems
>
>
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:48:32 -0500 I wrote:
> >NODESGEN is an unknown command on our VM Server and I've never had to
>
> And Nathan answered:
>
> >>That I don't understand.  Did you issue it and get an unknown command
> error?  It's been around for ages.  I see references to it clear back
> to 1.6d and the implication is that it existed before that.<<
>
> I get 'Unknown CP/CMS command.' when issuing it from the LISTSERV account.
> I'd already seen the command in the manual (wasn't sure what
> <WTONLY> meant
> as a variable) but issuing the command separately or with a
> variable causes
> the same 'Unknown CP/CMS command.' to appear.
>
> It is indeed old WUVMD.WUSTL.EDU but I've had to download the files
> manually since I started watching over things several years ago.  This is
> the first time we've had a problem.  I've had the procedure stored in a
> file so I can just copy/paste the commands in without worrying
> about typos.
> I assume it's been ftping as text since this is the first (possible)
> problem.
>
> I tried switching back to the old BITEARN NODES file from the previous
> update, just to make sure that there wasn't a problem with the new file,
> but the same errors and problems with distribution continued.
>
> About 1.8c and Y2K, Nathan wrote:
>
> >>1.8c is not Y2K compliant and I just saw a note from a site
> running 1.8c today whose PEERS and INTPEERS tables are outdated even
> though it's a registered site (BITEARN NODES was current) and which
> was reporting a Y2K-related problem.  I don't know for a fact that the
> two issues are related.<<
>
> I notice that our INTPEERS and PEERS NAMES files are dated, respectively
> 12/30/99 and 12/20/99.  These need updates, too??
>
> --Garrie

ATOM RSS1 RSS2