Matthias Saou (matthias@egwn.net) wrote*:
>As Red Hat does, I really don't recommend trying to upgrade between betas
>or from a beta to a final release either. Simply backup your /home, /etc
>(and /root and/or /usr/local/ if needed) then reinstall cleanly, it'll
>probably save a few hassles and you'll get the cleanest possible system ;-)
>
I think this is probably the best way, because I think (maybe) with upgrading you
do not always automatically get the latest feature enabled in some config file
because RH would rather take it easy and not update that config file (you get a
rpmnew instead of rpmsaved file) so they get less calls to support that way.
Anyway, I have tons of media files in /home/* probably 5 to 10 gigs at least, my
laptop's CDROM takes 700MB at a time (obviously) and compressing media files is
dumb because they are already compressed. Dumb question: how to backup huge data?
Network backup to another box? I do not have a box with a tape drive, but maybe box
with a large HD with much free space could take the backup (oops, I do not have a
space computer with a large HD with much free space).
These media files are backed up - ON THE CD'S THEY CAME FROM! Yes I learned that
used CDs make inexpensive backup copy on the shelf. I do not want to re-rip all
this crap again.
--
That's "angle" as in geometry.
_______________________________________________
RPM-List mailing list <RPM-List@freshrpms.net>
http://lists.freshrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

[Guido, on the classifier pickle on SF]
> I downloaded and played with it a bit, but had no time to do anything
> systematic.
Cool!
> It correctly recognized a spam that slipped through SA.
Ditto.
> But it also identified as spam everything in my inbox that had any
> MIME structure or HTML parts, and several messages in my saved 'zope
> geeks' list that happened to be using MIME and/or HTML.
Do you know why?  The strangest implied claim there is that it hates MIME
independent of HTML.  For example, the spamprob of 'content-type:text/plain'
in that pickle is under 0.21.  'content-type:multipart/alternative' gets
0.93, but that's not a killer clue, and one bit of good content will more
than cancel it out.
WRT hating HTML, possibilities include:
1. It really had to do with something other than MIME/HTML.
2. These are pure HTML (not multipart/alternative with a text/plain part),
so that the tags aren't getting stripped.  The pickled classifier
despises all hints of HTML due to its c.l.py heritage.
3. These are multipart/alternative with a text/plain part, but the
latter doesn't contain the same text as the text/html part (for
example, as Anthony reported, perhaps the text/plain part just
says something like "This is an HMTL message.").
If it's #2, it would be easy to add an optional bool argument to tokenize()
meaning "even if it is pure HTML, strip the tags anyway".  In fact, I'd like
to do that and default it to True.  The extreme hatred of HTML on tech lists
strikes me as, umm, extreme <wink>.
> So I guess I'll have to retrain it (yes, you told me so :-).
That would be a different experiment.  I'm certainly curious to see whether
Jeremy's much-worse-than-mine error rates are typical or aberrant.