RT 1.0.3 is out


#1

Over the past few months, there have been a few very minor bugfixes to RT1.0.
They’ve been rolled in with a slight ui tweaking for webrt. RT 1.0.3 was
released today… We encourage you to update once you’ve tested 1.0.3 on
a nonproduction system and have a full backup of your RT database and content.

ftp://ftp.fsck.com/pub/rt/release/rt.tar.gz

Thanks,

Jesse 

jesse reed vincent — root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
I think co-ordinating 1000 prima donnas living all over the world will be as
easy as herding cats…" – Andy Tanenbaum on the linux development model, 1992


#2

From NEWS:

31 May 2000

Some ui cleanups in the web ui. 

What were they? I’ve still got a broken web ui due to the massive number of
backlogged requests and the inability to display only a subset of open tickets
. . . my very own DoS :frowning:

-D


#3

Sadly, not that fix just yet. a simpler looking queue layout
and better respond and comment pages.On Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 07:31:16PM +0100, Darren Nickerson wrote:

From NEWS:

31 May 2000

Some ui cleanups in the web ui.

What were they? I’ve still got a broken web ui due to the massive number of
backlogged requests and the inability to display only a subset of open tickets
. . . my very own DoS :frowning:

-D

jesse reed vincent — root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
"If IBM wanted to make clones, we could make them cheaper and faster than
anyone else!" - An IBM Rep. visiting Vassar College’s Comp Sci Department.


#4

What were they? I’ve still got a broken web ui due to the massive number of
backlogged requests and the inability to display only a subset of open tickets
. . . my very own DoS :frowning:

There was a patch for limiting the search long, long time ago. Maybe you
can find it again or check out “my” FunRT branch from the cvs. Eventually
you can go into the source and hardcode a limit.

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are
cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”

  • Bertrand Russell

#5

I looked around but I didn’t see a CHANGELOG file anywhere. Is their a list
of changes somewhere I can view them?

-todd-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse [mailto:jesse@fsck.com]
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 11:14 AM
To: rt-devel@fsck.com; rt-users@fsck.com
Subject: [rt-users] RT 1.0.3 is out

Over the past few months, there have been a few very minor bugfixes to
RT1.0.
They’ve been rolled in with a slight ui tweaking for webrt. RT 1.0.3 was
released today… We encourage you to update once you’ve tested 1.0.3 on
a nonproduction system and have a full backup of your RT database and
content.

ftp://ftp.fsck.com/pub/rt/release/rt.tar.gz

Thanks,

Jesse 

jesse reed vincent — root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
I think co-ordinating 1000 prima donnas living all over the world will be as

easy as herding cats…" – Andy Tanenbaum on the linux development model,
1992

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users


#6

And so i says to him|her…
Don’t know right now. I’ll be travelling in central europe for a large chunk of this month, as will tobias. Things have, of course, taken longer than we’d hoped and there’s still a lot of work to do on 2.0…though large chunks of the core work now. If you have any spare programmer/hours to throw at it, It’ll certainly get done quicker :wink:

I’m very interested in seeing rt2.0 come to completion.

FYI, there is a bug in the devel makefile in the 'fixperms’
rule. I’d fix it , but my bourne shell scripting are skills
are pretty bad .

The error seems to lie in this if condition.

fixperms:
if [ ! -d $(RT_PATH) ] ;
then
chown -R $(RTUSER) $(RT_PATH)
chgrp -R $(RTGROUP) $(RT_PATH)
chmod 0755 $(RT_PATH)
fi

_Michael.

Michael Jastremski … AIM:rstfinsyn
WORK:liquidation.com ME:westphila.net/mike
PHOTO:opl.megaglobal.net … BIZ:megaglobal.net


#7

The error seems to lie in this if condition.

fixperms:
if [ ! -d $(RT_PATH) ] ;
then
chown -R $(RTUSER) $(RT_PATH)
chgrp -R $(RTGROUP) $(RT_PATH)
chmod 0755 $(RT_PATH)
fi

I hadn’t tested it at all, sorry, my fault. I added it after somebody
complained: “what if we set $(RT_PATH) to /usr/local?” - so I changed it
to only set those permissions if the dir is nonexistant. Any suggestion
how this one should look out?

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are
cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”

  • Bertrand Russell

#8

fixperms:
if [ ! -d $(RT_PATH) ] ;
then
chown -R $(RTUSER) $(RT_PATH)
chgrp -R $(RTGROUP) $(RT_PATH)
chmod 0755 $(RT_PATH)
fi

I hadn’t tested it at all, sorry, my fault. I added it after somebody
complained: “what if we set $(RT_PATH) to /usr/local?” - so I changed it
to only set those permissions if the dir is nonexistant. Any suggestion
how this one should look out?

and it’s difficult to set perms on something that does not exist. :slight_smile:

perhaps do not use ch* -R; instead

create rt_path as root
chown and chmod rt_path
su - rtuser -c fire off install script which ->
umasks rtuser (to reflect proper mode)
make ru_path/subdirectories
installs rt files there

that would halt anyone from being able to destroy perms on a system
directory accidentally, unless rtuser happens to be rewt.

i’m going thru majordomo’s config to see how they do it, but it’s totally
incomprehensible. :stuck_out_tongue:

    Blue Lang                              Unix Systems Admin
    QSP, Inc., 3200 Atlantic Ave, Ste 100, Raleigh, NC, 27604
    Home: 919 835 1540  Work: 919 875 6994  Fax: 919 872 4015

#9

and it’s difficult to set perms on something that does not exist. :slight_smile:

Agh … of course :slight_smile: Seems like the “mkdir” line was missing there.

perhaps do not use ch* -R; instead

no, -R is evil. I’ve heard rumors it might traverse through symlinks at
some systems.

su - rtuser -c fire off install script which ->
umasks rtuser (to reflect proper mode)
make ru_path/subdirectories
installs rt files there

That might work out … but I don’t have the time to fix it at the moment.
If you could make me a patch, it would have been nice :slight_smile:

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are
cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”

  • Bertrand Russell

#10

hi!

when will 2.0 come out?

robert


#11

Don’t know right now. I’ll be travelling in central europe for a large chunk of this month,
as will tobias. Things have, of course, taken longer than we’d hoped and there’s still a
lot of work to do on 2.0…though large chunks of the core work now. If you have any spare
programmer/hours to throw at it, It’ll certainly get done quicker :wink:

JesseOn Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 08:34:31PM +0200, robert rotman wrote:

hi!

when will 2.0 come out?

robert

jesse reed vincent — root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
"Mary had a crypto key / She kept it in escrow
And everything that Mary said / The Feds were sure to know" – Sam Simpson


#12

when will 2.0 come out?

“not yet”

Anyway, it’s possible to check out the latest source from the cvs and
submit bugreports (to rt20@fsck.com, eventually right to me), and probably
the road to a stable 2.0-release will go a bit faster. :slight_smile:

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are
cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”

  • Bertrand Russell