home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20000114-20000217
/
000011_news@columbia.edu _Sat Jan 15 22:25:33 2000.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-02-16
|
2KB
Return-Path: <news@columbia.edu>
Received: from newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.59.30])
by watsun.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA20986
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 22:25:33 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA09312
for kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 22:20:43 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu: news set sender to <news> using -f
Subject: Re: MS-DOS Kermit, more capabalities
From: cangel@famvid.com
Message-ID: <4Iag4.2679$NU6.52105@tw12.nn.bcandid.com>
Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:14:08 GMT
To: kermit.misc@columbia.edu
On 1900-01-14 jrd@cc.usu.edu(JoeDoupnik) said:
JD>Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
JD>In article <xuyf4.3236$0l4.86605@tw12.nn.bcandid.com>,
JD>>cangel@famvid.com writes: On 2000-01-13 jaltman@watsun.cc.
JD>columbia.edu(JeffreyAltman) said: >
--8<--cut
JD>> CA> While I have your attention I've been compiling and fiddling with
JD>> CA> the WATTCP package which claims to have a part of it's code inside
JD>> CA> MSKermit.
JD>> JA> WATTCP and Kermit's TCP stack parted company many Moons ago. they
JD>> JA> are hardly compatible anymore.
JD>> CA> Did the author of WATTCP assist when the code _was_ used many moons ago
JD>> CA> or was it a `maintainer' of the code?
JD> Please read what we said.
I did read what "we" said. "Parted company" in the USA implies that there was
some unpleasantness in the separation. The word "hardly" implies that there
are similarities in the code.
JD> Erick donated his code, bless him, I rewrote from that point forward. A
JD> fork in the road.
Possibly a more specific answer to the question would aid in my being able to
understand the answer. "Parted company", "hardly", and "fork in the road" are
poetic but not in any way specific. In a technical discussion they are no
answer at all.
>
> , ,
> o/ Charles.Angelich \o ,
> <| @AngelFire.com |> __o/
> / > USA, MI < \ __\__