home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
kermit.columbia.edu.tar
/
kermit.columbia.edu
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20000114-20000217
/
000037_news@columbia.edu _Mon Jan 17 15:55:54 2000.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2000-02-16
|
4KB
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 PAA10570
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:55:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA18647
for kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:46:54 -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: <UaLg4.6412$NU6.261988@tw12.nn.bcandid.com>
Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 20:44:36 GMT
To: kermit.misc@columbia.edu
On 1900-01-16 jrd@cc.usu.edu(JoeDoupnik) said:
JD> Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
JD> Charles,
JD> Despite all, you have a point, which was unstated but otherwise
JD> implied. It is the source files for MSK are difficult to pick out on
JD> Columbia's ftp/web site. They are, it's terrible trying to do this.
JD> To make things simpler right now please visit netlab1.usu.edu or
JD> netlab2.usu.edu, go into the Kermit directory and see a source
JD> subdir. Take what's there, which will be the source files for MSK 3.
JD> 15 (not 3.16). These are my machines.
Thank you.
I have to ask, and I'm sure I'll have regrets, but hasn't v316 been in
`beta' for an exceptionally long time now?
JD> No .boo files involved. Just grab all from source and build the
JD> works.
JD> To answer another implication, one can't readily convert this
JD> material into "libraries" nor pull out big chunks to move into
JD> something else (which would be a problem with copyright too). It
JD> isn't designed that way. But you can tinker for personal use and
JD> make things the way you want.
Yes, I `tinker' while others program.
JD> But please do not distribute that
JD> without our clearing things first, thanks; it is copyright, not
JD> public domain.
I regret the pervasive paranoia that exists today that would justify
your concerns but I can assure you that I have had and do not now
have any intentions to sell any terminal application derived from
earlier works.
JD> One can waste a lot of time trying to add non-MASM,
JD> non-MS C, making the code much more difficult to maintain for no
JD> real gain except individual personal satisfaction.
I don't happen to own MSC. Being able to compile the code would no
doubt be `personally' more satisfying than _not_ being able to compile
it. I would love to own every compiler ever written and just use
`make'. Wouldn't you too?
JD> This isn't Unix,
JD> it's DOS. And I do not wish to hear one word of complaint on the
JD> issue no matter what one's compiler/assembler tools or preferences
JD> happen to be.
My preference is to type `make < makefile', what's yours?
JD> What you seem to be impervious to, despite repeated
JD> reminders, is 94 byte Kermit packets is the original and default
JD> operating condition. In lieu of negotiations on the wire that is
JD> what is used, and it will work where longer packets will not. It's
JD> the specification of the protocol. That may not fit your particular
JD> tastes, but it is the standard and has been for eons.
Then you should remove html#7 (if I remember correctly) from your website
because it says this 94 byte default was an error and new versions will
use longer packets (1020?) as the default size and that those who require
the smaller packets will then have to reconfigure the application. Have
you read this?
JD> Also, we are
JD> not in the business of beating up on BBS operators, so their
JD> customers need to make any noises (with our blessings).
I don't think I advocated any beatings. An admission that you do in fact
have an html#7 and that your own website states that the 94 byte packet
default has damaged the public perception of what kermit transfers can
actually achieve would be nice. Or has it been removed recently?
JD> Enjoy the
JD> reading; it's dense tightly integrated material. No docs are
JD> included above, so please visit Columbia's machines for full docs
JD> and supporting files (scripts, hints and kinks, etc). Joe D.
Are the `scripts, hints, and kinks' in a particular directory or just
wherever they can be found?
Charles.Angelich