On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:34:44 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote: > > You may want to consider whether this is really cost-effective as > > you > > have to keep up with software updates for your system when you > > expose > > it to the outside world like this. I know that most Linux > > distributions require a bit of work up front to secure them and I > > just > > plain don't trust Windows. > > Nor I. But I keep all mine right up to date with auto update. Not > perfect, but as close as Microsoft can get at any moment. Yeah, I don't trust auto update, either, so... I can't wait until someone finds a vulnerability in auto update itself so that it automatically installs a virus. :-) > > Of course, if you do actually have a lot > > of pictures > > 50,000+ :-) Somehow that doesn't surprise me. And I suppose that's just this months, so far? > > maybe this will work out for you in the long run without > > having to pay for hosting + disk space. > > The FTP server requirement is so a limited number of others can share > the website capability remotely. > Volume and traffic would be low. These would only be applications > where being on my system would add value. You might want to look at www.wikipedia.org as a system to run. Set up is a breeze and then everyone or anyone can edit, which includes uploading images. You can set permissions and whatnot, of course. I am working (slowly in my spare time) on setting one of these up where I work for product and technology research and development information. I have mine running on Windows XP with mySQL, Apache, and PHP. If you poke around www.wikimedia.org, you'll find they have one wiki setup solely for public domain images. I think piclist.com should switch to something based off of the wikimedia engine instead of the, uh, wonderful homemade, uh, system that it is currently running. Bradley -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist