home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Columbia Kermit
/
kermit.zip
/
newsgroups
/
misc.20000114-20000217
/
000084_news@columbia.edu _Wed Jan 19 07:26:16 2000.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
2020-01-01
|
10KB
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 HAA04362
for <kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 07:26:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from news@localhost)
by newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA28913
for kermit.misc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 07:19:45 -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: <hXhh4.10313$NU6.453940@tw12.nn.bcandid.com>
Organization: bCandid - Powering the world's discussions - http://bCandid.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 12:17:18 GMT
To: kermit.misc@columbia.edu
On 2000-01-19 jaltman@watsun.cc.columbia.edu(JeffreyAltman) said:
JA> Newsgroups: comp.protocols.kermit.misc
JA> In article <VU7h4.9208$NU6.400327@tw12.nn.bcandid.com>,
JA> <cangel@famvid.com> wrote:
JA> [discussion of Michael as a wonderful person and macro
JA> programming genius deleted]
JA> Michael may be a fantastic macro programmer. But I do not
JA> have the time to be a consultant to everyone that chooses
JA> to send me several hundred lines of Kermit script.
A little encouragement from the author of the program would
mean the world to those who use it. You missed an opportunity
to do a good thing.
JA> [discussion of broken mail programs deleted]
JA> If the mail programs are broken then it would make the most
JA> sense to put the energy into fixing them.
There are people in the demon.uk newsgroup attempting that very
thing as we type and getting very similar results to mine with
you.
JA> Not trying to twist MS-DOS Kermit into something it was not
JA> designed to be; even if it can be made to do it.
If you didn't want people to _use_ the macros why were they
added to the program?
JA> I would be curious to see that. I use public access LYNX
JA> (because it includes a very good implementation of the
JA> kermit transfer) to browse websites when using MSK.
JA> The Kermit implementation that Lynx uses is C-Kermit. It
JA> does not have its own independent kermit implementation. It
JA> simply takes advantage of the work that has already been
JA> put into C-Kermit in much the same way that we advise BBS
JA> operators to take advantage of the work that has been put
JA> into MS-DOS Kermit.
See I was right, told you it was a good implementation. 8)
BTW: All BBS are not DOS based. Janis Kracht of PDN
headquarters tried to install C-Kermit with her LINUX based
BBBS and gave up. Her husband and son are both independent 'C'
programmers and work in their home. Go figure?
JA>CA> It is the same for Michel, a form of entertainment.
JA>JD> I have no plans of touching zmodem file transfer
JA>JD> material. It is a different universe to construct and
JA>JD> that would both bloat MSK and make life confusing to
JA>JD> users because of the much different command sets.
JA>CA> Millions do manage both. 8)
JA> What does this fact have to do with the situation at hand?
Users can manage two (count 'em) protocols at the same time.
JA> Professor Doupnik is the one that has to support the end
JA> users of MS-DOS Kermit. He does not want to have to
JA> suupport the users that will become confused. That is his
JA> choice.
Protecting the idiots so they don't embarass themselves trying
to use 2 (count 'em) protocols?
JA> [a lot of other extraneous arguments deleted]
CA> What is _needed_ is no more nor less than K95 user _need_.
CA> K95 needs zmodem and kermit, MSK needs the same. People are
CA> people even if they aren't corporate managers with cute
CA> titles.
JA> I am going to try to explain the history of Kermit 95 in
JA> some greater detail with the hope that people will stop
JA> trying to compare MS-DOS Kermit and Kermit 95.
I've reduced my request to a hook for external protocols quite
some time ago. If you want to discuss K95 plugins ok, if not
forget it.
--8<--cut
JA> When I was hired by the Kermit Project to develop a version
JA> of Kermit for the forthcoming Windows 95 operating system
JA> Jyrki and I made a deal. The result of the agreement was
JA> that the Kermit Project would receive the source code and a
JA> license to port it to Win32, but we did not have a license
JA> to release the source code to the public. The copyright
JA> would remain with him (or whoever he chose to sell it to.)
Did he know at the time that K95 was to become a commercial
venture or did he think it would remain as MSK has?
JA> When I said that I put Zmodem into Kermit 95 I meant it.
It implied that you wrote it. What you did was `port' it.
--8<--cut
JA> but using it in both. We were forced to implement
JA> workarounds for this because unlike Kermit protocol Zmodem
JA> did not provide for selective quoting of control characters
JA> because it was designed for 8-bit clean connections.
FDSZ has the '-e' switch to escape characters so it does do
this now AFAIK. I have used it to download via telnet.
--8<--cut
JA> .. The integration of Zmodem into Kermit when the API has
JA> already been written and the language is C, not assembler,
JA> is a non-trivial undertaking if you are going to do it
JA> correctly.
And I need to persuade someone to write it for me first.
JA> .. Performing Zmodem file transfers as an external add-on
JA> over a raw TCP/IP connection is possible; over Telnet it
JA> requires that there been a tight couplling between the
JA> Zmodem engine and the Telnet engine such that using an
JA> external process to handle the Zmodem will not work
JA> reliably in the very environment which you wish to use it.
I've done it using FDSZ many times.
JA> MS-DOS Kermit is distributed as a binary for the
JA> convenience of those without the necessary development
JA> tools, but its primary means of distribution is in source
JA> form.
On what planet? It took me almost a week and I never did get
the proper URL for it. Mr. Dold had to post it for me. Are you
for real?
--8<--cut
JA> When some one comes asks us to implement a feature we
JA> evaluate the feature and determine
JA> (a) if we understand the request; (b) how much fun it would
JA> be to refuse; (c) how much time it would take to convince
JA> some fool to donate it; (d) how much is too much; (e)
JA> whether it would break our code of silence;
JA> Then we decide whether it is something we want to do.
JA> The Zmodem question has been asked so many times over the
JA> last 15 years that somebody who just walks into this forum
JA> and says "Why don't you implement Zmodem" might interpret
JA> the negative response as a knee jerk response. It isn't.
Ah ... yes, jumping the wrong guy _is_ a knee jerk response.
--8<--cut
JA> Instead they pick up the phone.
And call someone like me, yes.
JA> To get some idea of what I think of the support you provide
JA> please review
JA> http://www.selfserving.com/kermit/we_r_great.html
--8<--cut
JA> somebody who we have never heard of before telling us what
JA> we should do,
I made a suggestion, get over it.
JA> how easy it would be to do,
I said enough for a programmer to understand what I was talking
about. Obviously you did not understand.
JA> and why we are jerks for saying "sorry, but no."
You didn't say `sorry' and you didn't actually say `no' - you
whined about it.
JA> It's really too bad you didn't use this "transport layer
JA> blob" phraseology with the author of WATTCP long ago. I'm
JA> certain the outcome of your joint venture would have been
JA> different than it has been and we wouldn't be having this
JA> conversation at all. Have a nice day.
JA> The separation of the WATTCP and MS-DOS Kermit code is
JA> ancient history. It is improper to look at the decisions
JA> that were made in 1991 given the changes that have occurred
JA> in the last nine years.
Your accomplishments are all `ancient history' IMO.
--8<--cut
JA> The reality is that given the circumstances at the time,
JA> decisions were made. To try to make the case that things
JA> woulld be different if only some person had known better is
JA> a waste of time.
I only wish Eric Engelke was here so you could refer to his
WATTCP as a "transport layer blob". THAT would be funny. 8)
No, on second thought, he doesn't deserve that much stress.
Forget it.
JA> P.S. The reason that I refer to Professor Joe Doupnik as
JA> Professor Doupnik in my postings is as a sign of respect.
I have nothing but respect for the accomplishment. I would give
much to go back and get a PhD. It would be a great personal
victory. God bless all who prevail in this.
--8<--cut
JA> P.P.S. Kermit 95 and a lot of C-Kermit 7.0 are the result
JA> of my hard work. Someone asked how much code there is:
No, I said it would be amusing to `diff' the latest version
with one a year ago and see how many lines have actually
changed.
--8<--cut
Most programmers I know don't think quite as highly of
`standards bodies' as you describe in what I just deleted.
I won't add or subtract from what is important to you. It seems
to be meaningful to you and that is reason enough to do it.
>
> , ,
> o/ Charles.Angelich \o ,
> <| @AngelFire.com |> __o/
> / > USA, MI < \ __\__