Date: Mon, 24 Jun 96 23:06:07 PDT From: Snuffles@kew.com Subject: UUPC-Info-Request Digest 1996 #12 To: uupc-info-digest@kew.com Message-ID: Reply-To: UUPC-Info-Request@kew.com UUPC-Info-Request Digest Mon, 24 Jun 96 Volume 1996: Issue 12 Today's Topics: A question Call from Taylor corrupted messages (UUPC/extended 1.12p OS/2) corrupted messages part 2 (UUPC/extended 1.12p OS/2) Error sending files help error message (2 msgs) Mail list server problem modem using IRQ 15 News reader ??? Questions rmail syntax for receiving host Script failed UUCICO bug UUPC & cc:Mail UUPC 1.12P (NT version) and TCP/IP conne UUPC as a service on NT What causes nswrite: Waiting ... messages? 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: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:12:52 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: A question To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 23 Apr 1996 19:21:32 -0600, ghoti@lao-tse.bohica.net wrote: > I'm just wondering if site hiding will allow me to run in 2 different > domains? The "bohica.net" domain is strictly for email, while the > "lcrnet.org" domain is primarily for news, although email is accepted > there, if need be. The only reason I'm doing it this way is that I get > email quicker via the "bohica.net" domain, and my email feed doesn't do > newsgroups as far as the leaf nodes go. Just alias one to the other, is what you want. No site hiding invoked. Why even use a domain on the news feed, since you can claim to be from your othersite? -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:27:58 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Call from Taylor To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Fri, 14 Jun 1996 16:34:12 +0200 (MET DST), plate@infotek.dk wrote: > I tried to let Taylor UUCP make a call to UUPC/Extended. > > I had the following result: > > MS-DOS(R) 6.22 with UUPC/extended 1.12k (skjold.tinored.cu) (COM3) > login: > (4) <== uuinfot > Password: > (4) <== Mucky0H > Welcome to skjold.tinored.cu; login complete at Sat, 25 May 1996 14:52:08 -0400 > (8) searchname: Looking for "infotek" of length 8, found "infotek" > (4) S state = J > (4) ==> ^pShere=skjold > (4) <== ^pSinfotek -R -N07 > (2) 1st msg from remote = Sinfotek -R -N07 > (0) Invalid argument "-R" from system infotek > (0) Invalid argument "-N07" from system infotek > (8) searchname: Looking for "infotek" of length 8, found "infotek" > (4) ==> ^pRLOGIN > (0) startup: Access rejected for host "infotek" > > Conclusion: UUPC does not understand (does ignore) the Taylor > options. > > Is that right? Correct. Turn off the debugging, no error message. :-) I presume the login got rejected for another reason? -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:41:02 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: corrupted messages (UUPC/extended 1.12p OS/2) To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Fri, 21 Jun 1996 10:06:35 +0200, lanz@sampling.uem.mz wrote: > Problem with UUPC/extended 1.12p (OS/2) > > I run UUPC under OS/2 Warp. The executables are on a HPFS > partition (as OS/2 itself), but the spool directory is on a FAT > partition, because I run - with the same UUPC system files - > sometimes the DOS version of UUPC/extended. 32 bit or 16 bit OS/2 version? > When I receive many (small) files from my host (I have to call the > host actively), the files get (too) often corrupted. I did work > for several months with the DOS version of UUPC (1.12p), and I > never encountered this error. An example of a corrupted message > can be found in the bottom of this mail message. Hmmm. In our experience, running the full listserv software (which really loads the system) in a mix of dos VDM and native OS/2 on a FAT partition has never had this problem. > Funny enough, the UUPC log files (i.e. uucico.log, uuxqt.log and > rmail.log on the DOS partition) never report the error! > > Unfortunately I know very little (nothing?) about the > configuration and settings of the UUCP server at the university. > It is a UNIX based machine. > > Because the error seems to occur mainly (only?) when I have a long > connection with the host (10 to 30 minutes; when the error > occured the last time, I received around 500 files with a total > amount of around 1 MBytes), I was thinking about a disturbance of > the communication caused by additional files added to the spool > directory during this time either on my or on the host side. Any > suggestions? We don't do 500 files at a pop, only ~ 200. > It is difficult (for me) to document the error, because I usually > auto-delete the mail file (the one with the 20 ASCCI ones as > message seperator) after extracting it to seperate files for every > mail message (this extracting routine happily finishes the work > without error message when it finds a corrupted section - I guess > because it finds a EOF character in the middle of the file?!). The > only thing I can do (at the moment), is to DOS undelete the > original mail file or the D files in the spool directory, where I > find the corrupted files as an example is shown in the bottom of > this mail. > Which steps should I follow to solve the problem? Disable ANY/ALL such software and see if the problem goes away. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:43:27 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: corrupted messages part 2 (UUPC/extended 1.12p OS/2) To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Fri, 21 Jun 1996 15:49:12 +0200, lanz@sampling.uem.mz wrote: > in addition to my posting 2 hours ago, I have to announce the > follwing findings: > > (1) the funny data file I reported, seems to have its origin > (partly ?) in the behavior of DOS undelete. > > (2) the corruption of data seems to come from messages with a HEX > 1A in it (that tells my Norton Commander when I look a the files > in HEX mode). > > Q: Is HEX 1A illegal in internet mail? More or less, yes. It's EOF to DOS. > Q: If yes, why does HEX 1A appear in the messages, then? See if it's REALLY in the messages, or Norton is putting it in. > Q: Any work around? > > If no, I have to find an other programm, that extracts the > messages from the UUPC mail file into single files, because the > one I use now stops when it encounters HEX 1A. Stop extracting for a while and see what happens. Has it occurred to your extracting program is the problem? What are you extracting, anyway? -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:06:07 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Error sending files To: UUPC/Extended mailing list I've been on mars again. Trying to catch up on my mail all at once ... On Thu, 21 Mar 1996 14:10:55 GMT-1MDT, Marthin.Stout@enterprise.cistron.nl wrote: > We have a strange problem: using UUPC/extended we can receive mail > but we can't send out any mail messages. > > What it comes down to is that UUCICO comes back with an error message > like: > > ssfile: Cannot open file 0666 (alphen/#3%9%). > alphen/#3%9%: No such file or directory > Extended DOS Error Information: Number = 2, Class = 9, Action = 3, > Locus = 1 > > (in which "alphen" is the name of the system we're connecting with). Once suspects a bad version of RMAIL, which version of UUPC/extended are you using? 1.12n had problems with some sequence numbers it was okay I think in 1.12k and again in 1.12p. > Again, receiving mail from this host works fine. > > I will send a file that contains the system-files and an abstract > from the uucico-log to everyone that needs that. > > Can anyone please help me with this problem ? For me this is urgent ! Whoops! -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:15:34 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: help error message To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Sun, 28 Apr 1996 21:15:33 -0700 (PDT), abbe@netcom.com wrote: > I installed a copy of UUPC for NT on my computer. But When I try to dial > my mail server, I got this error message from uucico: > C:\uupc\spool\uucico.log > 04/28-16:03 uucico: UUPC/extened 1.12b (Oct 4 1993 10:29:29) > 04/28-16:03 getsystem: Internal lookup error for system n: > I use "uuio -s all" this command, and I got my error message above. > Anyone has any idea what is Internal lookup for system n: means here? > Please let me know if you need anything else about my configuration file > to figure out why.. Not without seeing the systems file, but I'd suggest UUPC/extended 1.12p off www.kew.com or ftp.kew.com to see if it fixes the problem. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:21:16 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: help error message To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Mon, 6 May 1996 15:15:28 -0400, info@metrolink.net wrote: > Hello. Sorry if this is a FAQ type question. Does anyone know how to setup > UUPC/extended as a service (like UUCPD) to receive UUCP calls? What OS? NT? -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:33:20 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Mail list server problem To: UUPC/Extended mailing list No clue, look for additional error messages, and examine the address line in the call file odd information. On Thu, 20 Jun 1996 10:09:44 -0400 (EDT), slerner@Eingedi.Newton.MA.US wrote: > For some unknown reason, whenever a piece of mail get to my system > from this fine mailing list, my smail sends me: > > Warning: open_spool: /u1/smail/spool/input/0uUQus-0000Oya: lock > failed: Permission denied > > I have to manualy move the file from ../smail/spool/input to read it. > My system is Unix with smail. I'm looking to replace it with a Win NT > or Win 95 PC using UUCP/Extended. I thought that by subscribing to > the list server I'll be able to communicate with others who gained > experience with this setup. Oh, this is the only mail list server that > gives me this problem. I did get a mail from Katherine just fine. > Thanks for any clue as to how to fix it. > Shabtai > -- > S. Lerner |Internet: slerner@Eingedi.Newton.MA.US > 121 Walnut Hill Road |CompuServe: 73150,3102 > Newton, Massachusetts 02161 |UUCP: {...uunet}!linus!eingedi!slerner > > I am not arguing with you -- I am telling you. > -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:24:09 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: modem using IRQ 15 To: UUPC/Extended mailing list Under Windows 95, you can use and should use the Windows 95 binaries, which will use the Windows 95 interface to the modem -- then it won't care. If you are using Plug and Play on DOS, you get what you pay for. On Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:29:37 +0200, lanz@sampling.uem.mz wrote: > My friend has a problem - and i know nothing better then sending > his question to the list: > > Sorry, I did not manage to install my new modem, so I > won't send you the missing ... yet. The problem is > that the modem is "too modern", it has no jumpers or > anything similar. It comes with "plug-n-play" > software, and that software automatically configurates > the modem to use IRQ 15, which is not accepted by the > other software. So UUPC/extended for example returns > the message "modem did not initialize." I don't know > how to change this. Can you help me? > > And then: > > The modem is a Supra 288i PnP (internal 28,800 bps) > The COM-port can be chosen by the user (either 3 or > 4), (and I put the same number in the modem.mdm file). > The problem is that the IRQ cannot be chosen by the > user, as far as I could discover. It is the software > that sets the IRQ! > > > May his problem have something in common with the following > citate from the UUPC/extended documentation: > > Richard Gumpertz modified the internal DOS > communications driver (COMM.ASM) to better support > 8250 based serial ports, to handle RTS flow control > (to prevent the modem from over- running the serial > port), and to allow non-standard IRQ/port assignments > at compile time. (This latter support is not enabled > in the shipped executables.) > > Any help is very apprciated! Adrian. > > PS: My friend uses the DOS version (probably 1.12p) of > UUPC/extended. > > --- > Adrian Lanz Haeberlin > INTERNET: > --- -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 02:23:15 +0200 From: thomas@lenny.muc.de Subject: News reader ??? To: UUPC/Extended mailing list Hi, I enjoy using uupc but I can't read and post my news. Who can tell me which newsreader is compatible with uupc and comfortable to me. Thanks answering... Thomas. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:10:38 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Questions To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 16 Apr 96 08:58:40 EDT, garyn@VNET.NET wrote: > I just downloaded and set up UUCP software for OS/2. > > I noticed in one of kew's email messages that you caution not to use the 32-bit version, which I have been using today. What are the problems with it? What can happen if I use it? When converting to the 16-bit version, > can I just overwrite the executables and keep the configuration files I have > set up? Old message, use the 32 bit version. > A couple of fast questions re: operation -- > > Does anyone have a *.mdm file for a Hayes Optima 14.4? The *.mdm files I > downloaded from Hobbes are kind of old. Not me. > I received an error about unable to use "E C:\tcpip\tmp\uupcXXXX.TXT" or > whatever. I presume it can not fire up the E.EXE editor and log that temp > file. Why and how may I fix? Get 1.12p from http://www.kew.com, we fixed it. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:26:17 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: rmail syntax for receiving host To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:45:17 +0200, lanz@sampling.uem.mz wrote: > > I use UUPC/extended (DOS and OS/2 version 1.12p). > > For other reasons my aliases file looks something like this: Change it. See below. > > distrib-list: > > name1@domain1 > > tok1 tok2 > "tok3 tok4" > name5@domain5 (tok5 tok6) > > and so on ..., i.e. it uses a lot of different syntaxes for > internet mail addresses (besides, which version is official, is > there an official syntax?). I presume you mean the system aliases file. Whaty you are doing is flat out no supported. System aliases should be the simple address, with no comments or magic characters. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:17:49 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: Script failed To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On 29 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0000, hajo@quijote.in-berlin.de wrote: > I have the following systems entry: > > fub Any/Z,Sa/d,Su/d,Wk0500-0900/d,Wk1800-2100/d,Any2100-2400,Any0000-0500 Zyx1496e 57600 838,xxxx vgG ogin:--ogin:--ogin: Uhanta word:--word: xxxxxxxxxx > fub Any/Z,Sa/d,Su/d,Wk0500-0900/d,Wk1800-2100/d,Any2100-2400,Any0000-0500 Zyx1496e 57600 838,xxxx vgG ogin:--ogin:--ogin: Uhanta word:--word: xxxxxxxxxx > fub Any/Z,Sa/d,Su/d,Wk0500-0900/d,Wk1800-2100/d,Any2100-2400,Any0000-0500 Zyx1496e 57600 838,xxxx vgG ogin:--ogin:--ogin: Uhanta word:--word: xxxxxxxxxx > fub Any/Z,Sa/d,Su/d,Wk0500-0900/d,Wk1800-2100/d,Any2100-2400,Any0000-0500 Zyx1496e 57600 838,xxxx vgG ogin:--ogin:--ogin: Uhanta word:--word: xxxxxxxxxx > > > With this, I get a failed script for the _first_ try reliably, and a > troublefree login for the (automatic) _second_ try reliably. The failed > script looks like this: > > callup: Calling fub via Zyx1496e at 57600 on Mon Apr 29 14:11:34 1996 > wanted "ogin:" > got ??? "57600??!`H{;Cj}GJtc1qnx" > sending alternate > wanted "ogin:" > got ??? "}" > sending alternate > wanted "ogin:" > got ??? "}" > SCRIPT FAILED > > Directly after that, hanta logs in with the second try. How do I tweak my > script to log in with one try? I already shortened the echo by setting ATX4 > in the modem file, but this did not help. I wonder if it's getting a second modem line the second time. How long a time frame between the two tries? > My DOS UUCP program logs the welcome screen like this, without any need for > ATX: This on a first try? > ---------------------- > > > CONNECT 38400/ZyX 16800/V42 > > > methan.chemie.FU-Berlin.DE (fub) > > > > login: Uquijote > Password: > Last login: Mon Apr 29 10:13:08 on ttyd3 > -------------- -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:31:52 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: UUCICO bug To: UUPC/Extended mailing list This was changed, but in the opposite direction -- the datafile is now also deleted! Basically, rejects are not taken kindly ... On Tue, 18 Jun 1996 15:41:27 +0200 (MET DST), plate@infotek.dk wrote: > I've had the following output from uucico: > > 03/18-07:33 callup: Calling tinored via logipcme at 19200 on Mon Mar 18 07:33:55 1996 > 03/18-07:34 skjold connected to tinored: 19200 bps, g protocol, z grade > 03/18-07:34 ssfile: Remote host rejected file D.skjold04sor, reason 4 > 03/18-07:34 ssfile: Remote host rejected file X.skjold04sor, reason 4 > 03/18-07:35 0 files sent, 0 files received, 119 bytes sent, 11 bytes received > 03/18-07:35 9 packets transferred, 0 errors, connection time 0:09, 14 bytes/second > > After the failure, no file(s) has been sent and the controlling file > is gone! The mail cannot be sent in a following call without manually > get it from the spool queue. > > I used version UUPC/Extended 1.12k. > > The code: > > /*--------------------------------------------------------------------*/ > /* d c p x f e r . c */ > > [...stuff deleted...] > > if ((*databuf != 'S') || ((databuf[1] != 'N') && (databuf[1] != 'Y'))) > { > printmsg(0,"Invalid response from remote: %.50s",databuf); > fclose(xfer_stream); > xfer_stream = NULL; > return XFER_ABORT; > } > > if (databuf[1] != 'Y') /* Otherwise reject file transfer? */ > { /* Yes --> Look for next file */ > printmsg(0, "ssfile: Remote host rejected file %s, reason %s", > tName, > databuf[2] ? (char *) &databuf[2] : "unknown" ); > fclose( xfer_stream ); > xfer_stream = NULL; > return XFER_FILEDONE; [ * * * The error is appararently here * * * ] > } > [...] > > I believe that the return statement returns a wrong value and the > system thinks that the file transfer is complete. > > John > -- > John Plate -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:11:12 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: UUPC & cc:Mail To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Wed, 17 Apr 1996 11:39:25, ivaudrey@rowland.co.uk wrote: > Does anyone have any experience of using UUPC/extended as a gateway > for cc:Mail? Is this the correct place to ask? Actually, Lotus wrote a CC:mail gateway on top of UUPC, ask them. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:14:28 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: UUPC 1.12P (NT version) and TCP/IP conne To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Sun, 28 Apr 1996 15:30:01 -0400, brucep@stylus.com wrote: > I just got the NT version of UUPC 1.12P from ftp.clarkson.edu and I'm > trying to set it up to connect to a system via TCP/IP. I checked with > the host machine and it does support uucp (via uucpd) on port 540 as > outlined in the reference guide. > > I'm fairly certian I configured UUPC properly (I've used an earlier > version in the past so I'm fairly familiar with the package). I used the > TCPIP.MDM file for the modem description and set the phone number in the > SYSTEMS file to the uucp host (shore.shore.net) but when I try to connect > I always get an error that no route to the host could be found. If still interested ... Try kewgate.kew.com over the internet (same password, system name as for our dial link). We KNOW this works from an NT box, namely Dave Watt, the keeper of the NT flame. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:19:39 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: UUPC as a service on NT To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Mon, 29 Apr 1996 13:34:18 +0100, adrees@oxfam.org.uk wrote: > I want to run UUPC on an NT box.. I want to get ONE uucico to listen using=20 > TCPIP to enable incoming calls over our LAN.. while I leave another=20 > listening on the COM port. Is it possible to get this happening when there=20 > is no-one logged in... At the moment I can leave a session going, but if=20 > someone else needs that machine the UUCICO it gets stopped. I would rather=20 > it run as a service, Check your mailer, it's sticking =20 at the end of most lines. > ALSO . > > poll does not stop a UUCICO that is listening on a TCPIP port... What you mean by "poll", and why should it stop it? -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 21:20:25 -0500 From: uupcinfo@kew.com Subject: What causes nswrite: Waiting ... messages? To: UUPC/Extended mailing list On Tue, 30 Apr 1996 13:51:52 +0200, scm@silver.wcape.school.za wrote: > Occasionally I come across a modem which does odd things like this: > > (uucico.log ...) > > (4) process: Machine state is = h > (0) ShowModem: 0xa0 Carrier Detect Data Set Ready > (0) ShowModem: 0xb0 Carrier Detect Data Set Ready Clear to Send > > (last two lines repeated about 26 times) > > (4) *** timeout 4 (4) > (4) *** timeout 4 (4) > (4) *** timeout 4 (4) > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 0 > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 1 > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 2 > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 3 > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 4 > (4) nswrite: Waiting 710 ms for 4095 bytes in queue, pass 5 > ( and so on...) > > Sooner or later the modem drops carrier. > > This looks like a fault in the modem's implementation of flow control > (hardware flow control enabled, software x-on/x-off flow control > disabled). I've seen it happen on really cheap no-name modems, but > not on USR Sportsters or anything vaguely decent. > > What causes it? Do some modems just not do flow control properly? More likely, it's the UUCP 'g' protocol bug in UUCICO. -- 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. "Nuke the users and let IBM sort them out" -ahd-, out of context ------------------------------ End of UUPC-Info-Request Digest ******************************