david@uwvax.UUCP (David Parter) (05/22/85)
we have 2 3b2's, donated from att. They are being used by our
Undergraduate Projects Laboratory, a place for hacking and learning,
and maybe crashing systems, (but it doesn't hurt any student users
in normal classes).
i am attempting to set them up, and administer them. I can not find
uudecode, so sending encoded files from our other machines is a
problem. So far, the only file i want to send encoded is nothing
major, but the lack of uuencode and uudecode IS.
i will port uuencode and uudecode from our 4.2 vaxen. But how can
att sell a unix system, with uucp, without these tools?
david
--
david parter
UWisc Systems Lab
...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!david
david@wisc-rsch.arpahart@cp1.UUCP (R) (05/24/85)
We have almost 200 Unix machines and non of them have uuencode or uudecode. Are we missing out on something? -- =========================================================================== Signed by: Rod Hart (WA3MEZ) Minicomputer Technical Support District Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. A Bell Atlantic Company Silver Spring, Md. sabre!cp1!hart - gamma!cp1!hart - umcp-cs!cp1!hart - aplvax!cp1!hart ===========================================================================
david@uwvax.UUCP (David Parter) (05/24/85)
> We have almost 200 Unix machines and non of them have uuencode or > uudecode. Are we missing out on something? as the original poster, i will followup. The purpose of uuencode/uudecode is to encode/decode binary files for transmission via (uucp) mail. All of our 4.2 vaxen have it, as well as our Pyramid. Our local postmaster says it is vital for sending the above mentioned binaries. david -- david parter UWisc Systems Lab ...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!david david@wisc-rsch.arpa
heiby@cuae2.UUCP (Heiby) (05/27/85)
In article <200@uwvax.UUCP> david@uwvax.UUCP (David Parter) writes: >The purpose of uuencode/uudecode is to encode/decode binary files >for transmission via (uucp) mail. Sounds like a KLUDGE to me. If you want to transmit files, uucp works fine, even on binary files. I do it all the time. Now, if you want to pretend that these binary files are actually ASCII Text Mail, then you do have a problem. It shouldn't be to hard to read your binary and translate each 8-bit char into two Hexadecimal digits, with about 80 characters of output per output line (40 input characters). Reading it back in would (of course) ignore the newlines. If you don't have a C compiler available to you, then you have more problems. The real solution is to use uucp file transfer in the first place and not pretend that binary files are just text. -- Ron Heiby heiby@cuae2.UUCP (via wnuxa or wnuxb) AT&T-IS, /app/eng, Lisle, IL (312) 810-6109
honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman) (05/28/85)
you might consider uucp-ing binaries, instead of mailing them. peter
guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) (05/28/85)
> We have almost 200 Unix machines and non of them have uuencode or > uudecode. Are we missing out on something? "uuencode" and "uudecode" are programs which encode binary files into a form which uses only printable ASCII characters. They weren't provided with any release of UNIX from AT&T. They are provided with 4.xBSD. As far as I know, they are not covered by any license other than the AT&T UNIX licenses (if that) and maybe the 4.xBSD license, and will run under any UNIX implementation. They are intended to be used for mailing binary files via a mail mechanism which doesn't necessarily support mailing of arbitrary data. Guy Harris
arcorp@utcsri.UUCP (Alias Research Corporation) (05/28/85)
> We have almost 200 Unix machines and non of them have uuencode or > uudecode. Are we missing out on something? > > -- > > > =========================================================================== > Signed by: > Rod Hart (WA3MEZ) Indeed you are missing out on something. Uuencode is a useful utility that happens to be public domain. The author posted the sources to net.sources last year at about this time. Stephen Trutiak
dave@uwvax.UUCP (Dave Cohrs) (05/29/85)
> you might consider uucp-ing binaries, instead of mailing them. > peter Unfortunately, if the sending system is on a network that doesn't speak uucp, you can't uucp the files. This is the problem in this case. Proposing that the files be FTP'd to a uucp system and then uucp'd sounds like a lot of work. -- dave cohrs ...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!dave dave@wisc-limburger.arpa (bug? what bug? that's a feature!)
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (05/29/85)
>From: honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman) >Organization: Princeton University, EECS >Message-ID: <508@down.FUN> > >you might consider uucp-ing binaries, instead of mailing them. > peter What about when someone posts a uuencoded binary to the net? (or you yourself want to do so?) That's when you discover who your friends are. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: I never wanted to be a barber. I wanted to be... a LUMBERJACK!
hart@cp1.UUCP (Rod Hart) (05/30/85)
Maybe I am in left field asking this question, but why would anyone want to mail binaries? UUCP does a splendid job and you do not have to worry about file size. Maybe there is a need for security that I don't understand. Any attempt to mail or uucp sensitive material without proper precautions would be against corporate policy here anyhow. -- =========================================================================== Signed by: Rod Hart (WA3MEZ) Minicomputer Technical Support District Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. A Bell Atlantic Company Silver Spring, Md. sabre!cp1!hart - gamma!cp1!hart - umcp-cs!cp1!hart - aplvax!cp1!hart ===========================================================================
david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover) (05/30/85)
> you might consider uucp'ing files ... > peter Using uucp also doesn't work if you want to send the file farther away than one site. (You have to use uusend for that, but uusend doesn't come with anything but BSD products anyway). -- --- David Herron --- ARPA-> ukma!david@ANL-MCS.ARPA or ukma!david<@ANL-MCS> --- or david%ukma.uucp@anl-mcs.arpa --- Or even anlams!ukma!david@ucbvax.arpa --- UUCP-> {ucbvax,unmvax,boulder,oddjob}!anlams!ukma!david --- {ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!cbosgd!ukma!david "It's *Super*User* to the rescue!"
honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman) (05/31/85)
don't use uusend (to send a file > 1 hop), use uucp. the 3b2 comes with honey danber, which handles multi-hop. (the intermediaries must also run honey danber, and allow remote uucp requests.) peter
guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) (06/01/85)
> > you might consider uucp'ing files ... > > peter > > Using uucp also doesn't work if you want to send the file farther > away than one site. (You have to use uusend for that, but uusend > doesn't come with anything but BSD products anyway). System V's UUCP also supports multi-hop copying under some circumstances. (I think honey danber removed it - care to comment, peter?) More to the point, using UUCP doesn't work if you're eventually sending the file to a machine not running UNIX or if your machine doesn't have UUCP connections to the outside world but has mail connections. My workstation has an Ethernet connection to "sun" but can't talk UUCP to anybody (it could if it and "sun" were running the 4.3BSD UUCP, but they're not). Guy Harris
dave@uwvax.UUCP (Dave Cohrs) (06/01/85)
> don't use uusend (to send a file > 1 hop), use uucp. the 3b2 comes > with honey danber, which handles multi-hop. (the intermediaries must > also run honey danber, and allow remote uucp requests.) > peter Actually, this seems to point at the need to send files via mail rather than uucp. If you want to send a file through a heterogeneous environment you can't trust uucp to do it for you. Thus, because regular mail is more widely supported, people end up having to use it rather than something that only honey danber uucp supports. -- dave cohrs ...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!dave dave@wisc-limburger.arpa (bug? what bug? that's a feature!)
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (06/03/85)
>From: honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman) >Organization: Princeton University, EECS >Message-ID: <514@down.FUN> > >don't use uusend (to send a file > 1 hop), use uucp. the 3b2 comes >with honey danber, which handles multi-hop. (the intermediaries must >also run honey danber, and allow remote uucp requests.) I'm not sure that this is really a viable soultion. Even with the new low price, many sites may/will not be running Honey Danber. (Don't forget that we're talking about a net which doesn't even run a consistent version of the news software.) Allowing remote uucp access is also a funny thing. Even if you could prove it perfectly secure, there will probably be sites which will not allow it due to security concerns. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: I never wanted to be a barber. I wanted to be... a LUMBERJACK!
honey@down.FUN (Peter Honeyman) (06/04/85)
yes, system v uucp supported forwarding under some circumstances, but did so in a tasteless, arcane manner. (it looked at the incoming S request, and if it saw a !, well ...) the forwarding code was formidable -- massive and obscure. so we trashed it. then we fought about it. nowitz observed that a multi-hop uucp request could be effected by turning it into uux nexthost!uucp ... honeyman and redman opined that this was a job for a special utility, a la uusend, not a task for uucp. nowitz demonstrated that the implementation could be made concise and tasteful, unlike the previous efforts. honeyman and redman continued to sniff in disgust. nowitz, being bigger and louder than redman and honeyman put together, won. then we fought some more. redman observed that uucp could be made into a shell script that called uux on the nexthost, that consistency demanded etc., that code maintenance would be simplified, that etc. etc. redman, a passive and diminutive soul, lost this battle. in summary, both honey danber and system v uucp's support multi-hop requests, but they are incompatible with one another and all other versions of uucp. we judged that our ideas were so much better than our predecessors' that we could justify this incompatibility. besides, eventually everyone will run honey danber. cover the earth. addressing your other point, honey danber supported 4.2bsd sockets long before 4.*bsd uucp did. peter
david@uwvax.UUCP (David Parter) (06/04/85)
> In article <200@uwvax.UUCP> david@uwvax.UUCP (David Parter) writes: > >The purpose of uuencode/uudecode is to encode/decode binary files > >for transmission via (uucp) mail. > > Sounds like a KLUDGE to me.... > > The real solution is to use uucp file transfer in the first place and > not pretend that binary files are just text. > -- > Ron Heiby heiby@cuae2.UUCP (via wnuxa or wnuxb) > AT&T-IS, /app/eng, Lisle, IL (312) 810-6109 ok, now i will repeat what i have been busy answering via private mail since i posted the original complaint/question: 1) uucp works fine for transfering binarires -- from one uucp site to another -- but if you are in a situation where you can't do this -- ie machine A communicates to machine B via some other method, and machine B communicates with machine C via uucp, you have the following choices: a) copy the file from A to B with whatever methods you have, and the login to B and uucp from B to C, or b) encode the file, and mail iot from A to C. Mail knows how to negotiate the gateway from A to B to C. also, if you CAN'T login on site B, method b) above is the only choice avaliable. 2) i have uuencode/decode for 4.2, and will port it. david -- david parter UWisc Systems Lab ...!{allegra,harvard,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!david david@wisc-rsch.arpa