Date: Wed, 3 Jan 96 11:47:10 PST From: Snuffles@kew.com Subject: UUPC-Info-Request Digest 1996 #1 To: uupc-info-digest@kew.com Message-ID: Reply-To: UUPC-Info-Request@kew.com UUPC-Info-Request Digest Wed, 3 Jan 96 Volume 1996: Issue 1 Today's Topics: error with mailchek gatewaying mail to LAN Has anybody succeeded in transferring large files to a Taylor? history Mailheaders Question re subdomain routing TCP/IP connections tcp/ip with 16 bit OS/2 version uupc 1.12p (OS/2 32 bit mode) seems to ignore the '-n' parameter To subscribe to UUPC-Info-Digest, send the command in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com: subscribe uupc-info-Digest To signoff from UUPC-Info-Digest, use "signoff" instead of "subscribe". You can also send an "index" to the listserv to get an index of back issues and other files available for retrieval. Note: Questions on UUPC/extended itself which are not of general interest should be sent to help@kew.com, not to the mailing list. Nor questions should be posted on Usenet, we don't read it. (Much.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:55:56 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: error with mailchek To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 26 Dec 95 22:28:00 +0100, peter@pgeck.sub.org wrote: > I am getting errors with some of the cmd-files which come with > UUPC (I forgot to mention in my previous mail that I am using the > OS/2 32bit version). One example with mailchek: > > F:\uupc>mailchek > 25 +++ initcode = VInit(); > REX0043: Error 43 running F:\uupc\bin\mailchek.cmd, line 25: > Routine not found > > Obviously something is missing but I don't know what. I have rexx > installed and there is some vrobj.dll which should have to do > something with visual rexx (?) although I can't see what is > 'visual' with something like mailchek... MailChek puts up a small window like Xbiff to show you if you have mail. Hence the requirement for Visual Rexx, which actually manages the Window. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. PhD. Biologists cause cancer in laboratory rats. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 11:25:48 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: gatewaying mail to LAN To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Wed, 27 Dec 95 6:29:20 +0100, peter@pgeck.sub.org wrote: > I have a small LAN running via tcpip (OS/2). One machine (pgeck) > will have to serve as server for all communication purposes. It > has a dialup connection to the Internet and receives mail and > news via uucp over tcpip. I want to get access to news and mail > from two other systems on the LAN. There should be no problem > with news by using NNTP. But what about mail? I would like to > forward incoming mail via SMTP. But there are two problems. > Reading the docs I have the impression I need a gateway program. > Or could mail just be piped into sendmail? I would suggest a small wrapper to pass it off to sendmail, because you need to reformat the arguments to what sendmail expects. > Second problem is > related to the notorious OS/2 sendmail. I am not able to get mail > queued if the IP connection is down. Sendmail keeps telling me > that the mail could not be delivered and get queued but nothing > shows up in tcpip/etc/mqueue and the mail will never be delivered... Somewhere in my .sig database is the comment "Abandon all hope, ye who edits SENDMAIL.CF". This applies to most SENDMAIL related issues, especially the brain damaged version with OS/2. I know enough about it to know I can't support it. :-( I've considered writing simple SMTP programs to receive and send for RMAIL, but never felt it was enough of a priority due to the missing functionality in more core pieces. On Sat, 30 Dec 95 20:29:59 +0100, peter@pgeck.sub.org wrote: > I am getting mail from different mailing lists and want to have > it separated on arrival. According to the docs this should be > possible by setting up an alias (in aliases) like this: > uupcl: f:/user/peter/uupcl.spb > Mail for uupcl@pgeck.sub.org should then be saved as mail in the > above file. But it doesn't work for me. If there is no entry in > passwd for uupcl the mail is bounced. If I add the entry the mail > is saved in uupc\mail\uupcl.spb. What am I missing? I would suspect your aliases file is in the wrong place, unless you're using a REALLY old RMAIL. Issue: set uupcdebug=2 To see if the open failed On Sun, 31 Dec 95 7:51:42 +0100, peter@pgeck.sub.org wrote: > today I have got an error during processing of news. I had a look > at the news file and can't see anything abnormal. The file has > already been uncompressed so there can be no problem with > uncompressing. If you are interested I have kept the news file... > the error looked like this: > > [F:\tmp]rnews.exe 0 rnews: UUPC/extended 1.12p (OS/2 32 bit mode, 7Nov95 23:44) > newsrun: UUPC/extended 1.12p (OS/2 32 bit mode, 7Nov95 23:44) > General Protection Fault exception occurred at EIP = 00022DBD on thread 0001. > Register Dump at point of exception: > EAX = 00000000 EBX = 00031648 ECX = 0000000E EDX = 0000002E > EBP = 0007ECD0 EDI = 00031642 ESI = 00000030 ESP = 0007EBB0 > ˙CS = 005B CSLIM = 1BFFFFFF DS = 0053 DSLIM = 1BFFFFFF > ˙ES = 0053 ESLIM = 1BFFFFFF FS = 150B FSLIM = 00000030 > ˙GS = 0000 GSLIM = 00000000 SS = 0053 SSLIM = 1BFFFFFF > Process terminating. > newsrun command failed with status 99 > rnews aborting at line 154 in file D:\SRC\UUPC\news\rnews.c Various problems exist with news processing which I have documented on uupc-info, if you are not on the list please subscribe. These in general are caused by failed searches for news groups, and I have corrected for release 1.12r. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. "Don't blame me, I voted for Snuffles P. Bear!" - President@WhiteHouse.Gov ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 11:38:23 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Has anybody succeeded in transferring large files to a Taylor? To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On 03 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0000, hajo@quijote.in-berlin.de wrote: > I can receive any file or filesize. I can send small files with mail or > news. But I'm not able to copy over any big files. Define 'big'. > With uucp-v 1024, the connection will be killed by the Taylor for too many > protocol errors. It looks as if both sides don't agree about CRC > computation. The computation would be the same for all links. > With uucp-g, UUPC will happily receive 1024, but send 64 only. This nails > the connection to 1000 cps max. One end needs to be reconfigured to know you can send packets. Be sure to have GWindowSize=512. > Since uucp-v is just an uucp-g with less restrictions by default, I've done > a comparison check with my DOS site. In a DOS VDM, I can uucp-g-transfer > with both 1024 and 4096 blocksize and variable packetsize with 0 errors, > using Crosspoint instead of UUPC. This is to yourself? > Therefore the question: Was anybody able to send a really large file (1 > meg or more) to a Taylor uucico using 1024 blocksize or 512 at least? My Taylor UUCP based feed, which includes news, has very few errors, but they may still be back on 1.04. However, if the CRC computation changed between releases, I doubt the Taylor releases would inter-operate. For example, this morning: Remote K-Bytes K-Bytes K-Bytes Hours Hours AvCPS AvCPS # # # SiteName Recv Xmit Total Recv Xmit Recv Xmit Recv Xmit Con -------- --------- --------- --------- ----- ----- ------ ------ ---- ---- --- ci-pionee 74.880 276.252 351.132 0.01 0.09 1429 844 12 186 5 -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. WNTC radio - We Never Talk Coherently ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:51:22 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: history To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 26 Dec 95 22:04:47 +0100, peter@pgeck.sub.org wrote: > I haven't found anything in the docs. But as expire is very > unflexible I am afraid the history is no real history but just a > database of articles which are still existing... You're right. You also can't set expiration dates by group. Basically, expire and the history database was the most advanced part of the news system when Kai Uwe wrote it in support of TRN for OS/2. However, now with the more complex news distribution function both the expire and control functions have not kept up. I don't think they will get changed this iteration (this winter), but I am aware of their limits and they need work. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. "I am working ... where most people have never even heard of fax, and internet is something to take fishing." - Tony Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:37:10 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Mailheaders To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Thu, 14 Dec 95 0:34:49 +0100, eric@terra.xs4all.nl wrote: > My access provider just mentioned to me that they had to patch their > rmail heavily to get all the mail delivered right. When I asked what > was wrong, he told me that the header should start with > > From user date remote from node > > But I've noticed that the headers that are in my mails start with > > From terra.xs4all.nl!eric Thu Dec 14 00:22:52 1995 remote from terra > > So this means that the "terra.xs4all.nl!" part shouldn't be there. > Since I don't want to edit all my headers manually before polling, I > want to fix thisi automagically. How should I do this? Is this > standard behavior of UUPC that can't be fixed or did I make a > mistake somewhere? It cannot be reconfigured, it does need to be fixed. It's on my list. However, I am surprised it's causing delivery to fail, they should be looking at the control information (not part of the message) and the RFC-822 header. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. Remember, sometimes the dragon wins ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 11:02:30 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Question re subdomain routing To: UUPC/Extended mailing list > I just got UUPC/extended 1.12p to work over my TCP/IP connection. This is good. > It works perfect! (The probelm was my Winsock, but I am now using one > in Win95). In other words, the problem was not in UUPC/extended. This is in fact inline with my comments at the time that your problem could not be solved from here because of the system environment. > Now, we are setting up a uucp neighbor who will dial into our system and get > mail from us. The mail is addressed like this for users of his system: > > username@neighborsystem.oursystem.ourprovider.net > > but when we get the mail from our provider, the control file makes no mention of > the neighborsystem subdomain. There, the C line reads simply > > C rmail username The remote system needs to reconfigured to know about the remote system. This is system dependent. For UUPC/extended, it would automatically route properly if the hostpath file on the remote system specifies: *.oursystem.ourprovider.net oursystem.ourprovider.net -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. "I regret that I have but one fix to give for my country." - Nathan Hale ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:44:42 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: TCP/IP connections To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Mon, 18 Dec 1995 13:55:41 -0500, oss!conrad@uunet.uu.net wrote: > I am trying to connect, using TCP/IP, to a uucp server that doesn't have > a tcp/ip uucp port. It does, however, have tcp/ip and internet access. > Is it not possible to, rather than go through the uucp port, instead go > through the telnet port and log in the same way that my UUPC script used to > do when dialing in? That is, the only difference would be that the physical > connection would be by internet rather than by direct dial modem. The > script would be the same; g protocol would still be used, etc. It is undesirable to use telnet because the connection imposes additional overhead and may not be eight bit clean if going through a terminal server. (If the connection is directly from your UUCICO, you have another problem in that UUCICO does NOT handle the telnet protocol and the initial protocol exchange can fail.) UUCPD daemons can be gotton off the net, I would strongly suggest the site install one. If you want to try it anyway, the telnet port is specified by a colon (:) port number after the host name in the script file. uucp.server:23 -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. Remember, sometimes the dragon wins ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:39:17 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: tcp/ip with 16 bit OS/2 version To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Mon, 18 Dec 1995 10:49:04 -0500, oss!conrad@uunet.uu.net wrote: > I'm running the 16 bit OS/2 version of uupc, as shown below > mail: UUPC/extended 1.12p (OS/2 16 bit mode, 08Nov95 00:44). > > I've not run the 32 bit version because there was a warning in the > documentation that the 32 bit is not stable. > > My problem is TCP/IP. I cannot establish a connection using TCP/IP > because UUPC doesn't recognize 'suite=tcp/ip" in the modem file. I'm > guessing that this tcp/ip support is found in the 32 bit version of UUPC, > but not in the 16 bit. > > 1) Are TCP/IP connections supported in the 16 bit OS/2 version of 1.12p? No. We don't have the (obsolete) 16 bit tool kit. > 2) If not, is the 32 bit version more stable than the docs imply? The 32 bit version is very stable, and now preferred. The documents are being updated to reflect this. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. Remember, sometimes the dragon wins ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jan 1996 10:46:54 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: uupc 1.12p (OS/2 32 bit mode) seems to ignore the '-n' parameter To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 26 Dec 95 17:50:35 +0100, arnd@ag.mz.rhein-main.de wrote: > I'm trying to tell uucico to call despite limitations in the systems file (ie. > Wk1800-0800,Sa,Su) by adding the '-n' parameter to the call, but I receive the > usual "No work for requested system or wrong time to call.". > > Am I doing something wrong? > > Messages: > uucico: UUPC/extended 1.12p (OS/2 32 bit mode, 7Nov95 23:44) > No work for requested system or wrong time to call. I suspect you didn't provide the system name (-s system). The default is "any", which means work has to be queued for the remote system for it to be called. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-641-3452 To sign off from uupc-info, send the command "signoff uupc-info" in the body of a message to listserv@kew.com. DO NOT send this request to the list itself! For human assistance with the list itself, send mail to snuffles@kew.com. "I am working ... where most people have never even heard of fax, and internet is something to take fishing." - Tony Stewart ------------------------------ End of UUPC-Info-Request Digest ******************************