Date: Wed, 23 Apr 97 00:09:19 EDT From: Snuffles@kew.com Subject: UUPC-Info-Request Digest 1997 #8 To: uupc-info-digest@kew.com Message-ID: Reply-To: UUPC-Info-Request@kew.com UUPC-Info-Request Digest Wed, 23 Apr 97 Volume 1997: Issue 8 Today's Topics: 1.12R news problem Additional security at Kendra Electronic Wonderworks Bug in UUPC/Extended 1.12p (imfile.c) invoking uucico (2 msgs) Large file... (2) mail\mailsend.c Max length of UserID New installation of UUpc/extended 1.12p new web/ftp server previous system state = h (2 msgs) Reent- lines ... Waffle outbound spool style Warp WWW servers 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: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:06:02 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: 1.12R news problem To: "UUPC Mailing List" On Mon, 23 Sep 96 7:08:07 +0000, "Eric L. Logsdon" wrote: > I recently upgraded from 1.12j to 1.12r (OS/2 version). I > began getting errors out of newsrun as follows: > > 09/21-04:30 uuxqt: UUPC/extended 1.12r (Jan 20 1996 10:45:15) > 09/21-04:30 uuxqt: executing "newsrun -x 1" for user postmaster at logsdon > 09/21-04:30 d:\uupc\os2bin\newsrun.exe: OS/2 returned error code 193. > > I have imfiles set on and am running uucico with the -U option. The > high and low article numbers in the active file were both set the > same, even though I had files in the newsgroups. > > I have since gone back to 1.12j. Any help would be appreciated. Did newsrun itself have any error messages? I've stripped some hairy memory management out of 1.12s (the unreleased version) and once I put in a check for long newgroup lines, I'll put out 1.12s with that and the fix for netware and other long file system network names blowing up the NT/95 version. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 "Well I'm no hero that's understood . . ." - Bruce Springsteen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 17:39:25 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/Extended Support" Subject: Additional security at Kendra Electronic Wonderworks To: uupc-info@kew.com Mustafa's comment last fall about UNIX security is valid ... many UNIX systems on the net are not safe, but mostly because they are not configured correctly. I'm trying to avoid that fate. Thus, we have turned on an Internet firewall at KEW.COM. We're trying to be reasonably careful, without impacting access to FTP.KEW.COM or WWW.KEW.COM. Most users will be unaffected, but I remember a report from last year that some lame FTP program tried to ping the target system before issuing the connect -- that just ain't gonna work anymore, the firewall eats such messages. If you seem unable to connect to FTP.KEW.COM, try with another FTP program, and if that doesn't work, contact help@kew.com. If you wonder why pings are blocked, browse www.cert.org and look for, among things, the ping-of-death alert. Our network utility bear, Ping the Panda, is very distressed his namesake utility is being abused. Since this strictly a denial of service attack (if a hacker can't use it, nor can anyone else????) BTw, I'm almost done UNIX hacking, and thinking of my priorities for hacking UUPC/extended. I need to pull some test code I put in for memory management (which is buggy and doesn't save memory), and then I'll just work on the bug backlog for a while ... -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 Prince of Darkness: n. Lucas Electric ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 22:40:18 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: Bug in UUPC/Extended 1.12p (imfile.c) To: "Wiebe Vijge" On Wed, 6 Nov 1996 14:00:18 +100, "Wiebe Vijge" wrote: > > We use UUPC/Extended 1.12p (for DOS) in combination with UUPLAN 1.2 > (from www.wcape.school.za) and Pegasus Mail. And it works quite well; > the users on our LAN are very content with their > email-internet-connection. So on their behalf, thank you ! > > But... When we receive an email-message having more than 2 local > recipients, RMAIL.EXE crashes. See 'RMAIL.LOG' below. > > After adding the line " free (ioBuf); " just above line 890 in > IMFILE.C ( return 0; /* Return success ... */ ) this problem seems to > be solved. Your fix appears correct and has been applied to the 1.12s source. Thanks. > > This memory-leak has probably already been reported/fixed, No, it wasn't! > but just > in case, here are some details: > > What happens: > ------------ > for every recipient RMAIL calls Deliver(). > rmail:Deliver() calls deliver:DeliverGateway(). > deliver:DeliverGateway() calls imfile:executeIMFCommand(). > imfile:executeIMFCommand() calls imfile:imunload() > imfile:imunload() allocates -- but does not free -- an io-buffer used > to write the memory-image to disk. > So for every recipient of a single message (that is fed to an > external gateway program) memory is consumed from the heap. > > RMAIL.LOG: > ---------- > 11/05-18:13 rmail: UUPC/extended 1.12p (Nov 8 1995 07:29:54) > > 11/05-18:13 Gatewaying mail (971 bytes) from Wiebe.Vijge@Inter.NL.net > to postmaster@vektis via vektis using "f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe" > > 11/05-18:13 Gatewaying mail (971 bytes) from Wiebe.Vijge@Inter.NL.net > to rene@vektis via vektis using "f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe" > > 11/05-18:13 Gatewaying mail (971 bytes) from Wiebe.Vijge@Inter.NL.net to > wiebe@vektis via vektis using "f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe" > > 11/05-18:13 f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe: Not enough memory 11/05-18:13 Extended DOS > Error Information: Number = 2, Class = 8, Action = 3, Locus = 1 > > 11/05-18:13 Bounce: Mail from Wiebe.Vijge@Inter.NL.net for > wiebe@vektis failed, Gateway command returned non-zero exit status: > f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe vektis vektis wiebe Inter.NL.net Wiebe.Vijge > > 11/05-18:13 Gatewaying mail (971 bytes) from Wiebe.Vijge@Inter.NL.net > to root@vektis via vektis using "f:\net\uucp\uulan.exe" > > 11/05-18:13 imunload: Unablet to allocate I/O buffer for copy 11/05-18:13 rmail > aborting at line 862 in file lib\imfile.c > > 11/06-08:11 rmail: UUPC/extended 1.12p (Nov 8 1995 07:29:54) > ...... > ------------- > > I hope this helps, > > Wiebe Vijge (wiebe@vektis.nl) -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 09:14:14 +0000 From: "dilip" Subject: invoking uucico To: uupc-info@kew.com I am using uupc for a dial-up link with the local Isp. The uucp literature says uucico can be invoked from other programs.I use Telix for the link and then try to invoke uucico.The relevant line in the systems file is : ---------------------------------------------------- abcd Any HAYES24 4800 33333 g ogin:--ogin: efgh word:--word: ijkl ---------------------------------------------------- After Telix says connected at 14400 I send the login and passwd to get message.When I type uucico -w abcd the response is 'failed' or 'invalid' or 'divide overflow' etc.Obviously I am doing something wrong! should it be -wabcd without a gap ? or w efgh ? Should I type -z 14400 or -z 19200(only multiples of 9600 ?) Should I change any of the uupc config files like passwd or permissn etc for this purpose? I have sent a detailed query in the hope someone will send me a detailed reply. thanks a lot regards dilip ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 06:37:20 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: invoking uucico To: "dilip" On Thu, 13 Mar 1997 09:14:14 +0000, "dilip" wrote: > I am using uupc for a dial-up link > with the local Isp. > > The uucp literature says uucico can > be invoked from other programs.I use Telix for the > link and then try to invoke uucico.The relevant line > in the systems file is : > > ---------------------------------------------------- > abcd Any HAYES24 4800 33333 g ogin:--ogin: efgh word:--word: ijkl > ---------------------------------------------------- > > After Telix says connected at 14400 I send the > login and passwd to get message.When I type > uucico -w abcd the response is 'failed' or 'invalid' > or 'divide overflow' etc.Obviously I am doing something > wrong! should it be -wabcd without a gap ? or w efgh ? > Should I type -z 14400 or -z 19200(only multiples of > 9600 ?) It can be invoked for INBOUND calls. Why would you have telix dial and not UUPC/extended? In any case, it's not supported -- have UUCICO dial out itself. Telix not connected to the modem at 14400 (or should not be). The speed between the computer and the computer should be set to 19200, 38400, or 57600 (and the modem locked at that speed), and that's the number to drive uucico. (If you let UUCICO init the modem and set options=noautobaud, it pretty much does the right thing.) -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9812 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 resolved to be less offended by human nature this year, but I think I blew it already." - Hobbes ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 23:08:34 -0500 From: (Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/Extended Support) Software@kew.com Subject: Large file... (2) To: "curtis" On Thu, 6 Mar 1997 22:56:47 -0500, "curtis" wrote: > > I'll fix it RSN ... > > -- > > RSN? Real Soon Now (implies I won't get to it as soon as I should, as important as it may be.) -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 Harris's Lament: All the good ones are taken ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:54:35 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: mail\mailsend.c To: dima@irs.riga.lv On Sat, 8 Mar 97 16:36:17 +0200, "Dmitry Solodov" wrote: > I tried to recompile UUCP/Extended 1.12p source under OS/2 using IBM Visual > Age C++. To make it happen, the following was changed and probably should > be changed permanently Clearly, the original is a mistake, the change has been applied. > > mail\mailsend.c lines 946-954 > --------------- > else while( fgets( buf, LSIZE, stream )) > { > fputs( buf, fmailbag); > if( ferror( fmailbag )) // was "if ferror( fmailbag)" > { > printerr( tmailbag); > break; > } /* if */ > } /* else while */ > ------------- > > Are there any pending jobs on the software ? Pending releases, you mean? -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 "Well I'm no hero that's understood . . ." - Bruce Springsteen ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 18:03:18 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/Extended Support" Subject: Max length of UserID To: william@ains.aton.NET On Mon, 16 Dec 1996 10:27:45, "William Joye" wrote: > The UserID is fixed at 8 characters length. But is it possible to use for > incomming and outcomming mail a e-mail address with userID with more than > 8 characters ? How-to ? The requirement is that the user id be unique in the first eight, I believe. It's internally truncated but the header is left as the full name. If you have two users not unique in the first eight characters, the aliases file can be used to override the mailbox names so the mail goes to different mailbox names. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 "You don't know how far I'd go to ease this precious ache You don't know how much I'd give or how much I can take Just to reach you, just to reach you, oh to reach you . . ." - Melissa Etheridge ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 22:32:24 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: New installation of UUpc/extended 1.12p To: "David G. Hoch" On Sat, 05 Oct 1996 02:50:09 GMT, "David G. Hoch" wrote: > I have recently installed, and am now configuring UUPC/extended > v.1.12p. I plan to use the product in conjuntion with a product > called I-Gate, which should provide me with a dial-up SMTP connection > between my ISP and my Microsoft Mail system that is installed on my > Novell LAN. > > First I'd like to thank you for providing a user manual that is > actually useful, and even somewhat fun to read. > > My question is this, can I install UUPC/extended on my network (Novell > 3.12) harddrive and run a dedicated PC which logs on and accesses > files from the network drive? Yes. > It would make maintenance (i.e. adding > & deleting users, etc.) much easier and less disruptive if I don't > have to take the PC down to make the changes to it's hard drive. > I know that MS Mail installs on the network drive, but requires that a > few key files be stored on, and run from the local drive on its > "External" machine which it uses for dial-in/out. Can I set up > something similar with UUPC/extended? You can put all files on any drive letter. Note that the win95 version has a bug in 1.12r which causes network drives to die because the file system name of netware drives is too long for an internal buffer. This does not affect the DOS version, and the bug will be fixed in 1.12s. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 23:05:34 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/Extended Support" Subject: new web/ftp server To: "UUPC Mailing List" This evening the WWW and FTP servers were moved off our OS/2 server to a FreeBSD system, which allows better logging (and fewer crashes -- that OS/2 is backlevel on its service, and was flaming out under heavy WWW load.) Report any problems to me at the usual addresses. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 This space for rent. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 00:07:40 -0600 From: Dave Alarie Subject: previous system state = h To: uupc-info@kew.com A couple days ago, my UUPC/Extended setup (6 months old) stopped connecting successfully with the upstream host. It reports a the host to host connect with speed, protocol and grade levels. However after about 7 minutes the connection times out. The log entry finishes with this: process: Connection lost to uucp, previous system state = h 0 files sent . . . blah blah 118 packets . . . blah blah The modem on my side of the connection flogs the remote host during the 7 minute window. Occasionally, the modem indicates that the remote host is sending some traffic back. Is "previous system state = h" useful debugging information? -- ------------------- Regards, Dave Alarie ------------------- I like my Jello frozen. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 12:58:43 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: previous system state = h To: "Dave Alarie" On Fri, 28 Mar 97 00:07:40 -0600, "Dave Alarie" wrote: > A couple days ago, my UUPC/Extended setup (6 months old) stopped > connecting successfully with the upstream host. It reports a the host to > host connect with speed, protocol and grade levels. However after about 7 > minutes the connection times out. The log entry finishes with this: > > process: Connection lost to uucp, previous system state = h > 0 files sent . . . blah blah > 118 packets . . . blah blah > > The modem on my side of the connection flogs the remote host during the 7 > minute window. Occasionally, the modem indicates that the remote host is > sending some traffic back. > > Is "previous system state = h" useful debugging information? Not really. First thing to check is that the line is a pure dial-in to the host -- people seem to be to going in via terminal servers more and more, and this results in non-transparent connections. (i.e. the data being sent has ~ or a binary character which causes the terminal server in the middle not the UUCICO on either end, to hang.) -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9812 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. Plastic explosives will be appropriate later in the week. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:03:45 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: Reent- lines ... To: "UUPC Mailing List" On Wed, 25 Sep 1996 09:27:34 +1200, AWood@pdl-elec.co.nz wrote: > I have had to allow rmail to parse multiple resent- header lines as > pegasus mail just adds these lines at the front of the message if the > mail is automatically forwarded. > Here is the modification that I have made: > About line 1000 in rmail.c > ----------------------------------------------------- > if (( ! offset || equalni(buf, resent, offset )) && > equalni( buf + offset, > headerTable[subscript].text, > headerLen )) > { > if ( headerTable[subscript].found ) /* Been here > before? */ { > // if duplicate Resent: lines ignore 2nd set AGW18/09/96 > if(offset)break; > printmsg(0,"Parse822: Error: Duplicate header: %s", > buf ); > return NULL; > } > > headerTable[subscript].found = KWTrue; > blind = headerTable[subscript].blind; > output = headerTable[subscript].output; > > startAddress = buf + offset + headerLen; > > ----------------------------------------------------- > The RFC822 standard says that multiple Resent lines are not a good > idea and therefore the mail message may not make it through the > system but I thought since the change is so small that you may like > to do it. Not sure if a good idea or not. Comments from the list? -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 "Well I'm no hero that's understood . . ." - Bruce Springsteen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 18:59:52 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Support" Subject: Waffle outbound spool style To: "Mattias Bergsten" On Mon, 10 Mar 1997 12:20:56 +0100, "Mattias Bergsten" wrote: > If you could make UUPC support Waffle outbounds I'd .. I'd .. uhm.. I > don't know what I'd do to thank you.. :) I'm not going to, in all likelihood. > There are currently NO UUCICO's supporting Waffle outbounds AND TCP/IP > connections. The lUsers around the world running GIGO and Win95/NT > (like me) thus have no option other than to abandon the thought of > UUCP via TCP/IP, and so they use FXUUCICO or Waffle UUCICO and dialup. The correct way to interface to UUPC/extended is to use the UUX or UUCP program to add new requests into the queue. Writing the queue directly is a bad idea, for all the reason you can guess (no programs being alike). > Now. I have my nice little GIGO spool directory set up in my GIGO > config. In the spool directory, I have Waffle style outbound files, > like this: > > 97-03-03 20.28 98 0M0016.CMD > 97-03-03 20.28 1 282 0M0016.DAT > 97-03-03 20.28 109 0M0016.XQT > I'm sure that if you speak to Jason Fesler (jfesler@gigo.com), he'd > love to help you out with Waffle-outbound-programming. > > And I'd love to donate large amounts of money to you if you support it. ;) It would cost at least four digits. There is a number routines to be checked if the encoding changed. -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 "Well I'm no hero that's understood . . ." - Bruce Springsteen ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 13:06:32 -0500 From: "Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/Extended Support" Subject: Warp WWW servers To: "Curtis Maurand" On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 10:53:05 -0500, "Curtis Maurand" wrote: > this doesn't sound good. I was considering deploying a major website (up > to 30,000,000 hits per month on OS/2 Warp Server Advanced). Maybe I'll use > some flavor of Unix. It should work. The OS/2 site in my case is the original Warp Connect with the freebie version of the IBM ICS, and they specifically warn that it needs network service applied because MBUFs fill up. Any V4 Warp product, including Warp advanced server should already have the service applied. Ask someone else using it more, however, like Mustafa. I just don't see any local future in OS/2 to invest in the V4 upgrade, and since the service pack 26 didn't want to apply on my Warp V3 system, I'm moving stuff off the server prior to a conversion to FreeBSD or NT workstation. -ahd- -- Drew Derbyshire UUPC/extended e-mail: software@kew.com Telephone: 617-279-9712 Windows: The Gates of hell. ------------------------------ End of UUPC-Info-Request Digest ******************************