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]