Technology and Trends
 USENET Archives
  
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site emory.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!
whuxlm!akgua!emory!km
From: k...@emory.UUCP (Ken Mandelberg)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp
Subject: multihop uucp
Message-ID: <1564@emory.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Jan-86 19:12:19 EST
Article-I.D.: emory.1564
Posted: Wed Jan  8 19:12:19 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Jan-86 06:53:02 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: Math & Computer Science, Emory University, Atlanta
Lines: 26

I am trying to do a multi-hop file transfers between a combination of
System V systems,  and a single 4.2BSD systems. The problem is that
while the latest release of System V uucp supports multi-hops, 4.2BSD
uucp does not. On the other hand 4.2BSD has uusend for multi-hops,
while System V does not.

In one direction I am lucky. Originating from sys5a, I can say
	uucp <path-on-sys5a> sys5b!bsd!<path-on-bsd> which works.

However, I don't know a way to simulate:
	uucp <path-on-bsd>  sys5b!sys5a!<path-on-sys5a>

I would prefer not to use "mail" for the transfer for a variety
of reasons (some files are binary, some files are large-  uuencode
makes them larger, mail may be forwarded at the destination, etc).

Does anyone have a suggestion?
-- 
Ken Mandelberg
Emory University
Dept of Math and CS
Atlanta, Ga 30322

{akgua,sb1,gatech,decvax}!emory!km   USENET
km@emory                      CSNET
km.emory@csnet-relay          ARPANET

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site hoptoad.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!hoptoad!gnu
From: g...@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp
Subject: Re: multihop uucp
Message-ID: <425@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: Sun, 12-Jan-86 19:33:55 EST
Article-I.D.: hoptoad.425
Posted: Sun Jan 12 19:33:55 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jan-86 05:09:34 EST
References: <1564@emory.UUCP>
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 20
Summary: forget it.

In article <1...@emory.UUCP>, k...@emory.UUCP (Ken Mandelberg) writes:
> I am trying to do a multi-hop file transfers between a combination of
> System V systems,  and a single 4.2BSD systems. The problem is that
> while the latest release of System V uucp supports multi-hops, 4.2BSD
> uucp does not. On the other hand 4.2BSD has uusend for multi-hops,
> while System V does not.

You just have to treat multi-hop uucp as if it didn't exist.  Sorry.

Use compress on the sending end, uuencode, and mail to the recipient.
If they don't have compress, mail them the source for it too.
(Compress is a PD program 10* as fast as compact that gets like 60% squish.)
With luck the compress will cancel the uuencode.

[Begin political commentary.]

It's a shame that ATT won't let BSD adopt stuff from sysV so this could
be made to work.  (The problem is all the BSD sites that have pre-sysV
licenses.  ATT won't let them get sysV derived code.)  So much for ATT
working to unify the unixverses.

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site munnari.OZ
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gatech!seismo!munnari!kre
From: k...@munnari.OZ (Robert Elz)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp
Subject: Re: multihop uucp
Message-ID: <1032@munnari.OZ>
Date: Mon, 13-Jan-86 13:33:24 EST
Article-I.D.: munnari.1032
Posted: Mon Jan 13 13:33:24 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jan-86 00:26:25 EST
References: <1564@emory.UUCP> <425@hoptoad.uucp>
Organization: Comp Sci, Melbourne Uni, Australia
Lines: 37

In article <4...@hoptoad.uucp>, g...@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
> It's a shame that ATT won't let BSD adopt stuff from sysV so this could
> be made to work.  (The problem is all the BSD sites that have pre-sysV
> licenses.  ATT won't let them get sysV derived code.)  So much for ATT
> working to unify the unixverses.

I don't think that's really the problem - for some time now Berkeley
have made it plain that at some future time, a SysV licence would be
a requirement for some unknown future unspecified Berkeley release.

The problem at the minute is that SysV licences aren't interchangable,
AT&T in their infinite wisdom have decided that if you have a 68K
Sys V licence (for example) than you cannot be given code derived
from a Vax Sys V.

This is (I believe) the major hurdle at the minute preventing Berkeley
from requiring Sys V licences - which Sys V licence would it be?  Of
course, that's simple, Berkeley would have to require a Vax Sys V
licence, but can you imagine the conversation...

Person: "Here's my Sys V licence, signed Berkeley licence (2 copies),
and your $$$, can I have a BSD tape please?"

Berkeley: "No"

Person: "Why?"

Berkeley: "Your Sys V licence is for a 68k, not a vax"

Person: "But I don't have a Vax, I have a 68K!"

Berkeley: "Talk to AT&T...  It will cost you another $48,000"

This is absurd, rather than unifying the "unixverses", AT&T
seem to be specifically diversifying them.   Wierd!

Robert Elz		seismo!munnari!kre   kre%munnari...@seismo.css.gov