Search options (Page 25 of 77)

I'm keeping deathly quiet on this subject now. Looks sweet though. Btw, this part: title="ATOM". Atom should be first letter uppercase only, for correctness, I believe. Only RSS is an acronym, hence all uppercase.

fsck? Checking the filesystem/disk integrity are you? rm, dd, or newfs are the ones you want. (Not sure if newfs is BSD specific).

Stop blocking them in the robots.txt file then.

You're using local mail delivery then, rather than smtp.

Nice to know I'm not the only one who does that trick on occasion.

I wouldn't spend too much time trying to make them filter friendly. You'll find the likes of Yahoo/Gmail/AOL/Hotmail are a law unto themselves regarding what they term as spam. You will most likely fail to get most of them through.

Sounds like you're having a good evening? Have fun.

Did you tell it to add it to your list of feeds when you clicked upon it? Do you actually have a feed reader/client installed?

What extensions have you installed?

Btw, unrelated note. With your gallery software, why not just replace the space with an underscore? Would get rid of the encoded, (%20), space.

Right. That's the part I'm referring to then. The login is literally used to check and update the cookie. The cookie is then the roving authorisation, so to speak. However, if the cookie was to be trusted as is and used at all times, what's the point of the login timeout and re-login mechanism? The cookie could easily be updated without it. So why, if that's the case, should the cookie be trusted/used as an auth mechanism, (when the user hasn't logged in for a period of time), to authenticate their entitlement and access to the feed categories/forums? Normally, if the user has timed out, they need to login again to update the cookie as required, and the details are again checked against the db? However, if it was used as the auth key against the feeds, one part of the system is being removed, i.e: the login process. By virtue, that also removes one layer of security.

Btw, this all does make perfect sense in my head, but I've a feeling it's different when it's posted. If I'm still confusing everyone now, I'll concede the point.

I have that effect on occasion. The presumption I'm working upon is that the cookie stores, under normal conditions, the user id, password hash, etc. Upon login, the information is checked, verified against the login details, and any necessary cookie alterations/updates are then made. Is that correct?

My simple point is that if the cookie alone is not enough for general usage, why should it be an exception for an alternative connection method?