15 Nov
2002
15 Nov
'02
4:19 a.m.
All,
Just catching up on the digest. I think next time I beg for advice I'll
take digest mode *off* first. The delay is frustrating. Tony was way ahead
of me last night, but I didn't get the benefit of his advice until this
morning.
Tony D. said:
Correct, typo on my part.
I don't know the causality yet (failure causes comparator to switch, or
comparator switching causes failure), but the comparator (at least output
A) does switch when the failure appears. Output A is Pin 1 as you recalled
and Output B Pin 7, thanks to Toth for the link to the data sheet.
Now *I'll* bet - Tony wants to know what the comparator *inputs* are
connected to. Tonight's work is cut out for me. But in any case, I'm still
guessing the power supply is a likely culprit. It looks like the comparator
is properly protecting the mainboard from an overvoltage on +5V or +3.3V. I
don't know what's going on with +3.3 being referred to something other than
ground. In either case, a lower +5V supply (= appropriate repair to the
PSU) would solve the problem.
Is replacing all of the PSU output electrolytic capacitors just on
suspicion a good move? That's what I plan for the weekend. (Lucky for me
capacitors are not entitled to due process.. :-) )
- Mark
I will bet that
Red = +5V
Black = Gnd
Orange = +12V
Blue = -12V...
You'd win, as far as I can tell with my meter, with the minor variations
I've noted.
Blue is one
wire, and goes to appx. 12 V. when the system is on.
I would think the last one is actually -12V ? More intersting would be to
use a 'scope to look for noise (particularly spikes at the PSU switching
frequency). Such spikes can make a supply rail look to be too high on
some meters.
Yeah. Sigh. What's a likely frequency for the PSU switching? Is my
(primitive analog) VOM likely to yield any useful info if I set it to the
"AC Voltage" ranges?
M9124
LM393N
QST
Aha. A dual voltage comparator. This could be used to check if power is
OK, and to generate the reset signal as appropriate. 
15 Nov
15 Nov
4:28 a.m.
New subject: [OT] digest vs. mail filtering (was Re: Dying VaxStation 4000 VLC - help?)
Just catching up on the digest. I think next time I
beg for advice I'll
take digest mode *off* first. The delay is frustrating. Tony was way
ahead of me last night, but I didn't get the benefit of his advice until
this morning.
I've always found it more useful to subscribe to mailing lists in
non-digest mode, but to use email filtering software to put each
mailing list into its own separate mailbox, or to use separate email
addresses for subscriptions to each list.
On Linux (and Unix), procmail is commonly used for filtering, and is
quite flexible. Most GUI mail clients also have filtering capabilities,
although some are fairly limited.
10:19 a.m.
New subject: [OT] digest vs. mail filtering (was Re: Dying VaxStation 4000 VLC - help?)
On Friday, November 15, 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
On Linux (and Unix), procmail is commonly used for
filtering, and is quite
flexible
Procmail + formail = excellent. I used them to build a system that makes
unknown senders go through a confirmation process. There are other packages
out there to do this, but a procmail solution was the easiest to implement
for me. It's basically a way to rid myself of spam forever.
But... I haven't turned it on yet because it hasn't been adequately tested.
The last thing I want is to be digging through the backup file and find
something important that was not delivered.
--
Jeffrey Sharp
17 Nov
17 Nov
10:28 a.m.
New subject: [OT] digest vs. mail filtering (was Re: Dying VaxStation 4000 VLC - help?)
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 03:20:49PM -0600, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
On Friday, November 15, 2002, Eric Smith wrote:
How does the confirmation process work? Sending unknown senders an email
to identify themself als "human beings with a legitimate reason to send
you email" or do you confirm them by hand? How do you identify the
sender? Checking From: won't work, this headerline has been faked since
the invention of SMTP. You might take a look at spamfilters employing
bayesian (sp?) filters, they seem to work surprisingly well.
On Linux (and Unix), procmail is commonly used
for filtering, and is quite
flexible
Procmail + formail = excellent. I used them to build a system that makes
unknown senders go through a confirmation process. There are other packages
out there to do this, but a procmail solution was the easiest to implement
for me. It's basically a way to rid myself of spam forever. The last thing I want is to be digging through the
backup file and find
something important that was not delivered.
Thats why my simple .procmail rules for catching (some) spam _never_
drop mail altogether, but deliver into a dedicated folder, appropriately
named "SPAM" which gets checks (just From: and Subject: lines) by hand
once a week.
Regards,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
15 Nov
15 Nov
2:50 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 2581 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20021115/d3f1b09d/at…
7924
days inactive
7926
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
als＠thangorodrim.de -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
jss＠subatomix.com -
mtapley＠swri.edu