World: r3wp

Things do seem to be getting better in email land.

My canada.com account I had delegated as the 'send spam here' as 
I got harvested when they changed to a new service.  Today, expecting 
to troll through the hundreds of viagra ads, I got none.

I haven't cleard the mailbox in a few weeks, and all I got was a 
job offer.  A real one.  This job was not for me, it was .Net related 
but no spam.  Hmmm.

I think gmail use humans as the training... any spam I get I tell 
the gmail about... thus with millions of users... they have a perfect 
trraining engine, which allows them to get only "real" spam and they 
probably just do a content match.

In two years of using gmail exclusively, I have received less than 
10 spams to my inbox (I receive 70-100 a day) and receive many real 
mails to.


so far I have only detected 3 false positives in 3 years.  and since 
gmail aggressively collects all the mail addresses you've received 
and sent to, the white list is rapidly perfect with 0 need on my 
part.

I used to check and clear my spam daily... and after 1.5 years and 
finding only 2 I decided it was not worth the effort... the original 
send can always send another mail and ALL bets are that I WILL receive 
that mail  :-)

I've had about 30 false positives ... too many for me.

graham, you've been extremely unlucky :) i have checked every mail 
inside Spam for one week, and since everything seemed fine, i just 
stopped looking inside it. since gmail keeps the spam for 30 days, 
if ever i don't see a mail i expect or something a simple search 
inside spam should find it.

I send my self faxes by email ... they all end up in the spam folder 
:(

I've constructed a label for them .. makes no difference

I'll try adding them to my contact list.

I would like to see some way of Gmail adding subject lines to white 
lists

And yes, technology and I don't mix well :(

Look at headers of these emails, maybe you will find some hint why 
they are supposed to be a spam

My imap server kept shutting itself down.

Looks like my system clock was slightly fast by a few seconds.  When 
I reset the time using my script with nist.gov clock, the imap server 
saw that that the time went back by 10 seconds, and so decided to 
shut it self down to avoid causing problems!

Gabriele, I've just been going through
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions


and I'm attracted to distros that aren't too far from a root distro, 
eg. Ututo based on Gentoo, or Ubuntu based on Debian. Also, I've 
tried Slackware on some older machines recently and it has spawned 
several distros, so Slackware might be good. I want to do audio work 
so I'll be looking for a kernel compiled for low-latency audio.

How's your search going ?

This is a good distro for audio work:

http://www.dynebolic.org

Its creator is an old Amigan. :-) His parents even had an Amiga shop 
in Italy

pretty cool claims on the home page... k5 and 64mb minimum HW, no 
install, etc.

It's true. It is a distro from scratch with several unique features, 
and it has been going for a number of years

:) I've already briefly tried Dynebolic (or was it Pure:dyne ?)

Kaj, have you used it for anything ?

Not really, but it's one of the systems I've been following for years

I've spoken with the creator several times, since he now lives in 
Amsterdam

How is Syllable going, by the way ? It must be nearly time for my 
yearly attempt to install Syllable. (I have a new machine to install 
it on.)

For example, it's the fastest starting of all available distros

That is a good feature. :)

Not as fast as Syllable, of course. :-) Syllable is doing fine, but 
you still have about a fifty-fifty chance to get it to work. You 
may want to try the live CD first. If the install CD doesn't work, 
you can try the weekly build, which has additional fixes]

hardware support issues?

Yes, it's an enormous amount of work to get everything to work

But we're progressing

so when are you compiling it for Apple machines   ;-)

It should almost work as-is on Intel Macs. Just that as far as I 
know, the boot loader doesn't entirely support the Apple firmware 
yet. But the latest Macs might work

(I was pulling your leg a little there ;-)

OK, but it's probably closer than you thought. :-) Last year we said 
that Apple was porting the Mac to Syllable

hehe

Anton: I'll probably go with Kubuntu. It's based on Debian, it's 
well supported, and it has worked well enough for me in the past. 
I have used Gentoo but it's too much work (you get your own system, 
which is great, but it means you have to compile everything - and 
the config files need to be updated manually). I've never used Slackware... 
so I can't comment on it. I have a dynebolic CD, looks nice in its 
field, not sure as general-purpose.

Shameless plug;  Debian GNU/Linux 4.0
The Debian model is the way to go with Open Source.
Don't release software before it's time.

Regardless of the "It's late! It's late!" yelling and gnashing of 
teeth.
When it comes out, it's ready to come out.


Plus (the shameless part), the more rebols that code on a Debian 
base, the happier I'll be, with scripts that work out of the box. 
 :)

Gabriele, did you look at Mepis?

Linux DLL interface question: it looks to me, that if I declare


    settimeofday: make routine! [tv [struct! []] tz [struct! []] return: 
    [integer!]] libc.so "settimeofday"

and


    tv: make struct! [tv_sec [int] tv_usec [int]] reduce [seconds 0]

then

    settimeofday tv null-struct

works, but if I do instead:


    settimeofday make struct! [tv_sec [int] tv_usec [int]] reduce [...] 
    null-struct

, then it doesn't work. Can somebody confirm this?

I tried Ladislav;  I've never purchased a Command license, so have 
zero experience...

What are the defintions of

seconds   and null-struct

and I'll try it here under Debian and 2.7.5.4.2

And I guessed that libc.so  was  libc.so: load/library %/lib/libc.so.6

So far I've tried with

seconds: 0
null-struct: make struct! [secs [integer!] usecs [integer!]] none


All I'm getting back is a return code of -1  for both of your examples 
and remain too new to know what ERRNO is set to.  Plus I'm executing 
the code from a user process... so I did not expect it to work.

Under a root process the first form works...
and the second form works as well...

assuming I am anywhere near "getting it"

Of course it boned up my system clock...but that was easy to fix. 
 :)

then it worked, interesting

thanks for checking

Anytime...learned a lot.

-1 as the result: I think, that it means you didn't have the right 
to set the clock - I guess that only ROOT has