From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Sep 25 15:57:47 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA21623 for questions-outgoing; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rif.kconline.com (rif.kconline.com [207.51.167.75]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA21046; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 15:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (jriffle@localhost) by rif.kconline.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA09478; Wed, 25 Sep 1996 17:55:42 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 1996 17:55:39 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Riffle To: "Andrew N. Edmond" cc: questions@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WWW Search Engine? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 24 Sep 1996, Andrew N. Edmond wrote: > I am trying to provide a WWW search engine on my FreeBSD box, and have > installed Excite (in it's current incarnation, it doesn't work even with > the 2.2 kernel - well, it does, but not on a 250meg WWW directory) and am > told that the new version (coming out in 2 weeks) will not be > significantly improved software design-wise. Harvest is a convoluted > mess... are there other search engine options for FreeBSD? I have Excite running on a 2.2-Current and a 2.1.5 machine. Neither of these have 250 meg WWW directories though. Basically what I have found is it just doesn't like the perl binariry shipped with it. Replacing that, and a few other things,has made it work flawlessly for both of my sites. I am concerned about what you say though. One of my web servers probablly has around 150 Megs of stuff on it. If it is going to crap out when more data gets in there, I sure would like to know. What exactly is the problem with the 250 Meg tree? Or is that 250 megs in just one directory? Did you have the install script install the thing? If not, I can fill you in on how I got mine to work with that, it was a pain getting it installed. Is it having troubles making your index with that many megs? Thanks, Jim