need guestbook installed
chris
I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to do this
as yet, and dont have much spare time to learn how to do it right now.
Just wanted a few questions answered if you dont mind.
1) to be able to understand a cgi script and be able to tailor it to my
needs, wwould it take weeks, or is it fairly easy to grasp the basics?
2) would i be better off changing to a slightly more expensive server
(eg,webfusion.co.uk) who have scripts already installed and i can just click
a few buttons on the control panel and hey presto! it's installed and
running (i'd just have to then modify the form data, and graphics to blend
suite)
3) stick with my cheaper server and pay someone to install my guestbook
script!
This all depends on cost. How much can someone do this for?
Many thanks for your help
chris
Tom Melly
news:a967cn$b3n$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Hi
> I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to do this
> as yet, and dont have much spare time to learn how to do it right now.
> Just wanted a few questions answered if you dont mind.
> 1) to be able to understand a cgi script and be able to tailor it to my
> needs, wwould it take weeks, or is it fairly easy to grasp the basics?
As long as the server you are using supports perl, it shouldn't be too hard to
use a standard guest book script.
I would suggest the guestbook script
http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/scripts.shtml
These scripts are designed to be as easy to set up as possible, so no special
knowledge is required.
Nice site BTW.
chris
I'm going to try and attempt doing it myself. i'm feeling rather brave!
I'm using the script you recommended, so many thanks for the link to that.
Chris
"Tom Melly" <tom....@ccl.com> wrote in message
news:3cb6b409$0$8513$ed9e...@reading.news.pipex.net...
Godzilla!
> chris wrote:
(snipped)
> > I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to do this
> > as yet, and dont have much spare time to learn how to do it right now.
> > Just wanted a few questions answered if you dont mind.
> > 1) to be able to understand a cgi script and be able to tailor it to my
> > needs, wwould it take weeks, or is it fairly easy to grasp the basics?
> As long as the server you are using supports perl, it shouldn't be too hard to
> use a standard guest book script.
> I would suggest the guestbook script
> http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/scripts.shtml
> These scripts are designed to be as easy to set up as possible, so no special
> knowledge is required.
This guestbook script at this hatefully named "Not Matt's Scripts"
site is Perl 5 Cargo Cult Crap Code.
It is a slow, cumbersome, error ridden script employing some of
the most illogical techniques I have read and, is very easy to
crash with some of the oldest most simple hacks.
This sourceforge script makes use of an excessive number of
files along with unwarranted rather ignorant redirections.
It is as if this script was written to be as inefficient
as possible, as slow as possible and waste as much memory
as is possible.
A readme file included in the zip package, does not match
what is found in the .pl script file; it is very poorly
written lending only to confusion and mistakes.
Beneath my signature is a small sampling of errors found
within the first few minutes of testing.
I've written a lot of guestbooks over the years, for friends.
I would be embarrassed to write a guestbook of such low quality
as found at sourceforge.
Godzilla!
--
Too late for "-T" option at book.pl line 1.
Application Error
An error has occurred in the program
flock() unimplemented on this platform at c:/apache/users//test/book.pl line 200.
Application Error
An error has occurred in the program
Bareword "LOCK_EX" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at c:/apache/users//test/book.pl line 405. BEGIN not safe after
errors--compilation aborted at c:/apache/users//test/book.pl line 617.
Application Error
An error has occurred in the program
Can't Open c:/apache/users/test/book.html: No such file or directory
( This is due to Win32 truncation to three character extensions. )
test
Kira <call...@la.znet.com>
USA - Friday, April 12, 2002 at (Pacific Daylight Time)
"Pacific Daylight Time"
This is a time stamp?
*laughs*
--
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Ulimited downloads - 19 servers ==-----
Godzilla!
> Tom Melly wrote:
> > chris wrote:
(snipped)
Oh yes, this is backwards formatting, a classic sign
of programming by an amateur. So very typical of a
beginner Perl programmer to format body text before
an author and timestamp.
Love that timestamp.
Rather ironic three Perl 5 Cargo Cultists contributed
to this guestbook script and it is still crap code.
Being catty, clearly three of you boys working together
cannot match the quality of work written by one female
Perl programmer.
Meooooow!
Godzilla!
Tom Melly
news:3CB6E875...@stomp.stomp.tokyo...
<snip>
Well, I haven't tried the script, but most of the errors you document relate to
running the script under windows, for which it is obviously not designed. Okay,
you could make it run under both, but not safely.
Godzilla!
> Godzilla! wrote:
(snipped)
> Well, I haven't tried the script, but most of the errors you document relate to
> running the script under windows, for which it is obviously not designed.
You are making lame excuses via deliberate omission.
So you boys over at "Not Matt's Script's" consider portability
to be a non-issue just as you consider posting advertisements
containing derogatory remarks about Matt, to be a non-issue.
Incorrect use of taint checking, lack of a timestamp and
backwards formatting are not Win32 issues. I am quite
certain if I truly tested this script, I would find
myriad problems unrelated to Win32 systems.
Ease in hacking this script, is not Win32 system related.
These are two more which come to mind. Use of strict
and warnings should not be used in a final script.
Both decrease efficiency and serve zero purpose.
Should a typical person setting up this script
forget to turn off debugging, this would provide
a virtual list of "hacks" quite promptly. This
is not Win32 related.
Use of this script's email function for abuse,
is not Win32 related.
A readme file which does not match what is found
in the .pl file, is not Win32 system related.
Use of CGI.pm inflicts a minimum eight-hundred
percent loss in script efficiency for quote word
standard method. Based on my skimming of this script,
CGI.pm will cause an efficiency loss somewhere in
the range of one-thousand to twelve-hundred percent.
Otherwords, this script will run ten to twelve times
slower than Matt's equal custom read and parse method.
This is unrelated to Win32 systems.
Additionally, use of unwarranted redirections, use of
forced reloading of a page to view results, use of
various files to write, use of slow inefficient methods,
are all unrelated to Win32 systems and, all are very
illogical; very poor programming practices.
> Okay, you could make it run under both,
I personally certainly could and would.
> but not safely.
This is a false statement.
Bottom line is this specific script, this guestbook
script at sourceforge, is of lower quality than
Matt Wright's guestbook script.
I have not tested other scripts at sourceforge but
am quite certain this bottom line holds true for
all scripts at sourceforge.
Rather ironic, don't you think?
I would not use Matt's scripts nor sourceforge scripts.
Godzilla!
Tom Melly
>
> So you boys over at "Not Matt's Script's" consider portability
> to be a non-issue just as you consider posting advertisements
> containing derogatory remarks about Matt, to be a non-issue.
?What makes you think I'm anything to do with NMS?
Dave Cross
> Tom Melly wrote:
>
>> chris wrote:
>
> (snipped)
>
>> > I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to do
>> > this as yet, and dont have much spare time to learn how to do it
>> > right now. Just wanted a few questions answered if you dont mind. 1)
>> > to be able to understand a cgi script and be able to tailor it to my
>> > needs, wwould it take weeks, or is it fairly easy to grasp the
>> > basics?
>
>> As long as the server you are using supports perl, it shouldn't be too
>> hard to use a standard guest book script.
>
>> I would suggest the guestbook script
>> http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/scripts.shtml
>
>> These scripts are designed to be as easy to set up as possible, so no
>> special knowledge is required.
Ooh. Look. Kira's peddling the same nonsense about our nms programs in
another newsgroup.
> This guestbook script at this hatefully named "Not Matt's Scripts" site
> is Perl 5 Cargo Cult Crap Code.
The scripts are called "nms". They ar not called "Not Matt's Scripts".
That was a working title we used when first discussing the scripts. You
won't find any of the project team using that term. I've explained this
to you before. Why won't you listen?
> It is a slow, cumbersome, error ridden script employing some of the most
> illogical techniques I have read and, is very easy to crash with some of
> the oldest most simple hacks.
If you find bugs, we'll be very happy to investigate and fix them. The
support mailing list is nms-cgi...@lists.sourceforge.net. You'll get
a replay and probably a fix within 24 hours.
> This sourceforge script makes use of an excessive number of files along
> with unwarranted rather ignorant redirections. It is as if this script
> was written to be as inefficient as possible, as slow as possible and
> waste as much memory as is possible.
What is an "ignorant redirection".
We use exactly the same files as Matt Wright does. Is that excessive?
The program is written to be as secure as possible and to be an example
of best Perl coding practices. This may mean that it's not as fast as
other less secure scripts. If speed is important to you then you
shouldn't be using CGI. All of the nms scripts are currently being
changed so that they also work under mod_perl. That should fix any speed
issues.
> A readme file included in the zip package, does not match what is found
> in the .pl script file; it is very poorly written lending only to
> confusion and mistakes.
If there is a problem with the README file then we'd be happy to fix it
if you tell us what is wrong.
> Beneath my signature is a small sampling of errors found within the
> first few minutes of testing.
Thanks. We'll look at the problems.
> Too late for "-T" option at book.pl line 1.
You mean your web server isn't configured to run all Perl scripts in
taint mode? That's a nasty security risk you're running there Kira.
> Application Error
>
> An error has occurred in the program
>
> flock() unimplemented on this platform at c:/apache/users//test/book.pl
> line 200.
Which version of Perl are you running? Latest versions of ActivePerl
include support for flock.
> Application Error
>
> An error has occurred in the program
>
> Bareword "LOCK_EX" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at
> c:/apache/users//test/book.pl line 405. BEGIN not safe after
> errors--compilation aborted at c:/apache/users//test/book.pl line 617.
Again, this is to do with the version of ActivePerl. Latest versions
support this. As do _all_ Unix versions of Perl.
> Application Error
>
> An error has occurred in the program
>
> Can't Open c:/apache/users/test/book.html: No such file or directory
>
> ( This is due to Win32 truncation to three character extensions. )
Which Windows platform is this? Do Microsoft _still_ insist on 3
character extensions?
> test
> Kira <call...@la.znet.com>
> USA - Friday, April 12, 2002 at (Pacific Daylight Time)
>
> "Pacific Daylight Time"
>
> This is a time stamp?
That's interesting. Maybe your version of Windows doesn't have good POSIX
support. I'll look into it.
Kira, you could be a bit less confrontational about this. You do seem to
have indentified some problems with the code. But they will get fixed.
And quickly. There's really no need to be so antagonistic about it.
Dave...
--
.sig missing...
Dave Cross
> Tom Melly wrote:
>
>> Godzilla! wrote:
>
> (snipped)
>
>
>> Well, I haven't tried the script, but most of the errors you document
>> relate to running the script under windows, for which it is obviously
>> not designed.
>
> You are making lame excuses via deliberate omission.
>
> So you boys over at "Not Matt's Script's" consider portability to be a
> non-issue just as you consider posting advertisements containing
> derogatory remarks about Matt, to be a non-issue.
Tom has nothing to do with the development of nms.
_Please_ stop using the term "Not Matt's Scripts". We don't use it as we
think it's too negative. You're to the only person progating its use.
> Incorrect use of taint checking, lack of a timestamp and backwards
> formatting are not Win32 issues. I am quite certain if I truly tested
> this script, I would find myriad problems unrelated to Win32 systems.
It's not incorrect use of taint checking. It's broken web servers that
don't understand the shebang line. Any script using -T on the shebang
line would have the same problem.
The issues with the timestamp probably _are_ a Win32 problem. It's to do
with POSIX support as we use POSIX::strftime to create these timestamps.
We will investigate.
> Ease in hacking this script, is not Win32 system related.
How can you hack the script?
> These are two more which come to mind. Use of strict and warnings should
> not be used in a final script. Both decrease efficiency and serve zero
> purpose.
That's nonsense. You're the only person who suggests this. You are wrong.
As I've said in another post, if the tiny performance hit you get from
using strict and warnings is a problem then you shouldn't be using CGI.
Look at mod_perl or FastCGI instead.
> Should a typical person setting up this script forget to turn off
> debugging, this would provide a virtual list of "hacks" quite promptly.
> This is not Win32 related.
What are these hacks?
> Use of this script's email function for abuse, is not Win32 related.
Please explain how it can be abused?
> A readme file which does not match what is found in the .pl file, is not
> Win32 system related.
Please explain the discrepancies that you found.
> Use of CGI.pm inflicts a minimum eight-hundred percent loss in script
> efficiency for quote word standard method. Based on my skimming of this
> script, CGI.pm will cause an efficiency loss somewhere in the range of
> one-thousand to twelve-hundred percent. Otherwords, this script will run
> ten to twelve times slower than Matt's equal custom read and parse
> method. This is unrelated to Win32 systems.
It's also complete nonsense. See my comments on efficiency above, but
please also note that there is no basis whatever for the numbers you
quote above.
> Additionally, use of unwarranted redirections, use of forced reloading
> of a page to view results, use of various files to write, use of slow
> inefficient methods, are all unrelated to Win32 systems and, all are
> very illogical; very poor programming practices.
I'm unclear what you mean by this and I suspect that you are too.
>> Okay, you could make it run under both,
>
> I personally certainly could and would.
We thought we had. We'll certainly fix it.
>> but not safely.
>
> This is a false statement.
I suspect I might have to agree with Kira here. But we'll see.
> Bottom line is this specific script, this guestbook script at
> sourceforge, is of lower quality than Matt Wright's guestbook script.
This seems to be a minority opinion Kira. Most Perl experts who have seen
it seem to think it's a great improvement on Matt's script.
> I have not tested other scripts at sourceforge but am quite certain this
> bottom line holds true for all scripts at sourceforge.
The quality of all the scripts is similar, so if you don't like this one
then you're almost certain not to like the others.
> Rather ironic, don't you think?
Er... no.
hth,
Dave...
--
Shoot some of those missiles, think of us as fatherless scum
It won't be forgotten 'cause we'll never say anything nice again
Will we?
Godzilla!
> Godzilla! wrote:
> > Tom Melly wrote:
> >> chris wrote:
(snipped)
> >> > I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to do
> >> I would suggest the guestbook script
> Ooh. Look. Kira's peddling the same nonsense about our nms programs in
> another newsgroup.
You are full of crap and your scripts at your hate site,
"Not Matt's Scripts," are Perl 5 Cargo Cult Crap Code
residing down there amongst the worst of Perl scripts.
Both you and your hate site serve only one purpose;
to spread discontent and hatred, historically well
evidenced by your words and actions within USENET.
You both built and promote your site based upon
unbridled personal hatred. Clearly, your chickens
are coming home to a messy offensive roost.
Godzilla!
Dave Cross
> Dave Cross wrote:
>
>> Godzilla! wrote:
>> > Tom Melly wrote:
>> >> chris wrote:
>
> (snipped)
>
>> >> > I want to add a guestbook into my site but havnt got a clue how to
>> >> > do
>
>> >> I would suggest the guestbook script
>
>> Ooh. Look. Kira's peddling the same nonsense about our nms programs in
>> another newsgroup.
>
> You are full of crap and your scripts at your hate site, "Not Matt's
> Scripts," are Perl 5 Cargo Cult Crap Code residing down there amongst
> the worst of Perl scripts.
Please try to understand this Kira. The site is not called "Not Matt
Scripts". I've told you this a number of times. Why can't you understand?
It's only you who continues to use this pejorative phrase.
> Both you and your hate site serve only one purpose; to spread discontent
> and hatred, historically well evidenced by your words and actions within
> USENET.
If it's well evidenced by by words and actions then perhaps you could
provide references. I don't think you'll find any evidence of me
spreading discontent and hatred.
Hopefully anyone else who is reading this thread sees me being calm and
helpful. You're the only one throwing bile and insults.
My site exists purely to provide well-written alternatives to some
commonly used, but very insecure CGI scripts.
> You both built and promote your site based upon unbridled personal
> hatred. Clearly, your chickens are coming home to a messy offensive
> roost.
I don't hate Matt. I've never said that I do. I think his scripts are
horrible and I'm happy to go on record as saying I don't think he's a
very good Perl programmer. I don't think that's "unbridled personal
hatred". Since nms has been publicised, Matt and I have exchanged a few
emails. It's all been very friendly and he's happy to admit that when he
wrote the MSA scripts he was just learning to program.
I'll reiterate my main points so we're very clear here.
1/ The project is not called "Not Matt's Scripts".
2/ I don't hate Matt Wright.
Does that help?
Godzilla!
> Godzilla! wrote:
> > Dave Cross wrote:
> >> Godzilla! wrote:
> >> > Tom Melly wrote:
> >> >> chris wrote:
(snipped)
> Does that help?
You will do best to help yourself by posting a public
apology to Matt Wright, to all readers, for your public
derogatory hateful articles of record, then promptly
removing your "Not Matt's Scripts" hate site from the
internet as an act of decent ethics and contrition.
I am certainly not the only person to object to your
spreading of discontent and hatred. This is not the
first time you have been prompted to post an apology.
Your activities disgrace our Perl community.
Dave Cross
> Dave Cross wrote:
>
>> Godzilla! wrote:
>> > Dave Cross wrote:
>> >> Godzilla! wrote:
>> >> > Tom Melly wrote:
>> >> >> chris wrote:
>
> (snipped)
>
>> Does that help?
>
> You will do best to help yourself by posting a public apology to Matt
> Wright, to all readers, for your public derogatory hateful articles of
> record, then promptly removing your "Not Matt's Scripts" hate site from
> the internet as an act of decent ethics and contrition.
Like I said before, I haven't posted any hateful derogatory articles about
Matt Wright. If you think differently then please show us all the articles
that you mean.
And I'm getting tired of telling you this Kira. The site is _not_ called
"Not Matt's Scripts". You are the only person still using this term.
If you can find any evidence that the nms web site
<http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/> is a hate site then please let us know
what you find offensive so we can consider whether we agree and decide
whether to remove it.
> I am certainly not the only person to object to your spreading of
> discontent and hatred. This is not the first time you have been prompted
> to post an apology.
You're talking about this thread in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi
(see, I'm quite happy to to supply references to previous discussions, why
can't you do the same.
Re-reading it I see that no-one except you objected to the contents of the
posting. Three or four other people commented on some of the text on the
web site which (as I've told you before) has now been changed.
The web site now says:
"The problem is that the scripts in Matt's Script Archive aren't very
good."
Oh, and in the FAQ it says:
"Among the Perl community, the MSA scripts are known to be badly-written,
buggy and insecure."
Does that sound like like hate to you? It merely states facts. Facts that
Matt himself would almost certainly agree with. There's no hate there. I
don't hate Matt.
But just to be very clear, let me say this:
I don't hate Matt Wright. I have never intentionally written anything that
was meant to imply that I hate Matt Wright. If anything that I have ever
written has given the impression that I do hate him and has caused offence
to him then I'm very sorry.
There. Does that help?
> Your activities disgrace our Perl community.
Actually, with the exception of you. All of the feedback I've got from the
Perl community has been very positive. You're the only one who seems to
think I'm a disgrace. If you know differently, then perhaps you can
provide references.
Dave...
--
"Don't you boys know any _nice_ songs?"
Tom Melly
news:pan.2002.04.14.10....@dave.org.uk...
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:41:03 +0100, Godzilla! wrote:
>
> > Tom Melly wrote:
> >
> >> Okay, you could make it run under both,
> >
> > I personally certainly could and would.
>
> We thought we had. We'll certainly fix it.
>
> >> but not safely.
> >
> > This is a false statement.
>
> I suspect I might have to agree with Kira here. But we'll see.
>
Hmm, the specific error regarding flock occurs, afaik, when you try to lock a
file under windows 9x (I have no idea what the state of play is with
nt/2000/xp). Apart from turning off filelocking in the script, I don't know how
this could ever work. If file locking is turned off, won't the script be unsafe?
(not in the "hackable" sense, but in the sense that the guestbook might end up
being corrupted).
I am happy to be enlightened in this respect.
BTW who is this Godzilla person? My impression is a miserable troll who delights
in disconcerting newbies with unhelpful and agressive responses, but I am also
happy to be enlightened in this respect as well.
Dave Cross
> "Dave Cross" <da...@dave.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:pan.2002.04.14.10....@dave.org.uk...
>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:41:03 +0100, Godzilla! wrote:
>>
>> > Tom Melly wrote:
>> >
>> >> Okay, you could make it run under both,
>> >
>> > I personally certainly could and would.
>>
>> We thought we had. We'll certainly fix it.
>>
>> >> but not safely.
>> >
>> > This is a false statement.
>>
>> I suspect I might have to agree with Kira here. But we'll see.
>>
>>
> Hmm, the specific error regarding flock occurs, afaik, when you try to
> lock a file under windows 9x (I have no idea what the state of play is
> with nt/2000/xp). Apart from turning off filelocking in the script, I
> don't know how this could ever work. If file locking is turned off,
> won't the script be unsafe? (not in the "hackable" sense, but in the
> sense that the guestbook might end up being corrupted).
My understanding is that later versions of ActivePerl contain code that
"fake" flock on Windows platforms that don't support it natively.
I'm no Win32 expert, but some people on the nms team are and they're
looking into it right now.
If it is impossible to get flock working then we might have to resort to
a (yuck) lock file approach.
> I am happy to be enlightened in this respect.
I'd love to know for sure too :)
> BTW who is this Godzilla person? My impression is a miserable troll who
> delights in disconcerting newbies with unhelpful and agressive
> responses, but I am also happy to be enlightened in this respect as
> well.
You now know as much about her as I do.
Dave...
--
Drugs are just bad m'kay
Tom Melly
> > BTW who is this Godzilla person? My impression is a miserable troll who
> > delights in disconcerting newbies with unhelpful and agressive
> > responses, but I am also happy to be enlightened in this respect as
> > well.
>
> You now know as much about her as I do.
>
BTW Godzilla? Kira? Dave?
When Godzilla is referred to as Kira, is this:
a) Godzilla's real name
or
b) an extremely obscure reference to the fact that Kira in "Ultraman vs Kira" is
actually Godzilla?
Dave Cross
I understand it to be her name. Your second alternative may well explain
why she chose the pseudonym Godzilla.