merlin@hqda-ai.UUCP (David S. Hayes) (12/18/86)
Posting this for a friend: Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? I would like to run news and mail on a Sperry box. Any pointers? Please reply via phone, I don't have net access. Mark Niedzielski 301-738-6676 or 202-234-6461 -- David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon PhoneNet: (202) 694-6900 ARPA: merlin%hqda-ai@brl-smoke UUCP: ...!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin
sansom@trwrb.UUCP (Richard Sansom) (12/19/86)
In article <228@hqda-ai.UUCP> seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin writes: >Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? >I would like to run news and mail on a Sperry box. >Any pointers? For that matter, does anyone out there know of any uucp sources for the micro world in general? (Sorry if this is an old issue - I'm new to this group). Thanks in advance. -Rich -- __________ ______ ____ _____ ___ /_________//___ ||__|/____|/__/ Richard E. Sansom ___ ____/ / ____________ TRW Electronics & Defense Sector / / / /\ < | /| / One Space Park Drive, R3/1028 / / / / \ \ | / | / Redondo Beach, CA 90278 /__/ /__/ \__\|__/ |__/ ...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!trwrb!sansom
bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (12/24/86)
In article <1480@trwrb.UUCP> sansom@trwrb.UUCP (Richard Sansom) writes: >In article <228@hqda-ai.UUCP> seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin writes: >>Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? >>I would like to run news and mail on a Sperry box. >For that matter, does anyone out there know of any uucp sources for >the micro world in general? Last I heard, the only package available was from Lauren Weinstein (@ vortex?) for $200, no source. I haven't seen anything posted by him in a while, so I don't know if he's still on the net. -- New .signature under construction.
cgf@ednor.UUCP (Chris Faylor) (12/28/86)
>In article <228@hqda-ai.UUCP> seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin writes: >Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? >I would like to run news and mail on a Sperry box. Ross Greenberg, author of the "RamNet" background communications facility for the IBM PC has just announced an augmentation to RamNet to allow it to do UUCP communications. If I understand his plans correctly, he will soon be offering different "drop in" overlays to handle any type of communication protocols (like YMODEM, KERMIT, ZMODEM). I have been using RamNet for a year now and it does work as advertised. You can transfer files to and from another PC while doing other stuff in the foreground. Ross is constantly improving the product, too. You can get more information at the following address: Software Concept Design 59 Third Avenue New York, NY 10016 (212) 889-6431 The price for RamNet is currently $149. I have no connection with Ross other than as a buyer of seven copies of his product. -------- -Chris Faylor- {harvard,decvax}!wanginst!ednor!cgf {{harvard,ll-xn}!adelie,{decvax,allegra,talcott}!encore}!munsell!ednor!cgf "I feel more like I do now than I did when I first got here."
crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (12/31/86)
> > Posting this for a friend: > > Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? > I would like to run news and mail on a Sperry box. > Any pointers? > > Please reply via phone, I don't have net access. > > Mark Niedzielski > 301-738-6676 or 202-234-6461 > -- > David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon > PhoneNet: (202) 694-6900 > ARPA: merlin%hqda-ai@brl-smoke > UUCP: ...!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin Program "uuslave.c" On a BBS in New Jersey there is a program called uuslave it is under the UNIX/XENIX programs section. It comes in C source and it might do what you ask or be a foundation for it. Programs are free on the board. The number for the ACGNJ-BBS is (201) 753-9758 . -- Rick Tillbrook
gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) (01/02/87)
In article <904@mhuxi.UUCP>, crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (Rick Tillbrook) writes: > Program "uuslave.c" > > On a BBS in New Jersey there is a program called uuslave > it is under the UNIX/XENIX programs section. It comes in > C source and it might do what you ask or be a foundation > for it. Programs are free on the board. > The number for the ACGNJ-BBS is (201) 753-9758 . Before everybody calls this number, be warned that it is not a public access system. You can get in and read the bulletins but the *ss*oles that run it will not let you download software from it without running a mini-TRW check on you. As if your receiving PD software from them could endanger them in any way. Give me a break. PS: If there are any "authorized users" for this wimp bbs out there, please grab the uuslave.c file and mail it to me. I will post it to net.sources. (If everyone who reads this grabs the file and posts it, we will get 30 copies of the file -- so mail to me and I'll just post one.) -- John Gilmore {sun,ptsfa,lll-crg,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@ingres.berkeley.edu I forsee a day when there are two kinds of C compilers: standard ones and useful ones ... just like Pascal and Fortran. Are we making progress yet? -- ASC:GUTHERY%slb-test.csnet
davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP (01/02/87)
In article <1607@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: >In article <904@mhuxi.UUCP>, crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (Rick Tillbrook) writes: >> ... stuff about a BBS with useful software > >Before everybody calls this number, be warned that it is not a public >access system. You can get in and read the bulletins but the *ss*oles >that run it will not let you download software from it without running >a mini-TRW check on you. As if your receiving PD software from them >could endanger them in any way. Give me a break. As the operator of a BBS, I have to come back on that one! I run a small BBS for the local UNIX user's group, and offer it to the public for $10. This is used to send the user's manual certified mail, return receipt requested. This protexts me against some of the problems caused by having idolt users post charge numbers, etc, on the board. I can prove that there was someone at a given address who signed for a letter, and I have the signature on file. Before I instituted this policy I got all sorts of goodies, including someone who posted some ATT source code, a way to beat the local phone service, and an add from a hooker! I don't need that grief! People who run a check on users are NOT *ss*oles, they are NOT worried about you taking their software. They DO want to eliminate the bulk of the users who use phoney names, and post all sorts of illegal stuff. I think you should (publicly) rethink your position. Nobody makes any money off a BBS (even those charging $50/year), and you should consider the reasons for an action before shooting off your mouth. -- bill davidsen sixhub \ ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz -> crdos1!davidsen chinet / ARPA: davidsen%crdos1.uucp@crd.ge.com (or davidsen@crd.ge.com)
bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (01/03/87)
In article <904@mhuxi.UUCP> crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP writes: >> Does anyone know where to get a uucp program for MS-DOS? > Program "uuslave.c" > On a BBS in New Jersey there is a program called uuslave > it is under the UNIX/XENIX programs section. It comes in > C source and it might do what you ask or be a foundation > for it. Programs are free on the board. > The number for the ACGNJ-BBS is (201) 753-9758 . >-- Rick Tillbrook It's a long way from NJ to Seattle (esp. at 300bps).. if somebody has "uuslave.c" could they post it (I bet a lot of people would like to have it!) or e-mail me a copy? -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill chan 'eil Gaidhlig math againn /kha nel' gal'ig' mweh ag0n'/ (we do not speak good Gaelic)
crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (01/06/87)
> In article <904@mhuxi.UUCP>, crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (Rick Tillbrook) writes: > > Program "uuslave.c" > > > > On a BBS in New Jersey there is a program called uuslave > > it is under the UNIX/XENIX programs section. It comes in > > C source and it might do what you ask or be a foundation > > for it. Programs are free on the board. > > The number for the ACGNJ-BBS is (201) 753-9758 . > > Before everybody calls this number, be warned that it is not a public > access system. You can get in and read the bulletins but the *ss*oles > that run it will not let you download software from it without running > a mini-TRW check on you. As if your receiving PD software from them > could endanger them in any way. Give me a break. > > PS: If there are any "authorized users" for this wimp bbs out there, > please grab the uuslave.c file and mail it to me. I will post it to > net.sources. (If everyone who reads this grabs the file and posts > it, we will get 30 copies of the file -- so mail to me and I'll just > post one.) > -- > John Gilmore {sun,ptsfa,lll-crg,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@ingres.berkeley.edu > I forsee a day when there are two kinds of C compilers: standard ones and > useful ones ... just like Pascal and Fortran. Are we making progress yet? > -- ASC:GUTHERY%slb-test.csnet The ACGNJ-BBS used to be an OPEN, NO REGISTRATION BOARD but due to all the children out there of all ages it requires you to leave your real name and a phone number. If anyone has ever run a BBS they will find out quickly why you can't leave it open. You get tired of Donald Duck, Goofy and the the elfs leaving obsene messages or credit card numbers and info. The best are the neat little trojan horses which attempt to wipe out the BBS or the hard disk of the unsuspecting person who calls the totally open BBS and downloads that little jewel. A verified user is unlikely to play game or won't last long on a BBS. Many open BBSs are so much work to keep clean they have a short life. Why should I spend my time, money and energy to provide a computer, phone lines and free PD programs to those who don't appreciate what is being done? If you want to remain anonymous, don't call the board, I don't care. -- Rick Tillbrook
yerazuws@rpics.RPI.EDU (Crah) (01/06/87)
In article <1054@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>, davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP writes: > In article <1607@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: > >In article <904@mhuxi.UUCP>, crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP (Rick Tillbrook) writes: > >> ... stuff about a BBS with useful software > > > >Before everybody calls this number, be warned that it is not a public > >access system. You can get in and read the bulletins but the *ss*oles > >that run it will not let you download software from it without running > >a mini-TRW check on you. As if your receiving PD software from them > >could endanger them in any way. Give me a break. > > Before I instituted this policy I got all sorts of goodies, including > someone who posted some ATT source code, a way to beat the local phone > service, and an add from a hooker! I don't need that grief! > > People who run a check on users are NOT *ss*oles, they are NOT worried > about you taking their software. They DO want to eliminate the bulk of > the users who use phoney names, and post all sorts of illegal stuff. I > think you should (publicly) rethink your position. I can see both sides of the story on this one - having had a FIDO for a while, it can become nervewracking to wonder what someone just posted. On the other hand, there ought to be some way for this poor fellow to get his UUCP stuff without becoming a full-fledged user. BBS's are supposed to HELP communication, not hinder it. A friend (in Massachusetts, runs the WayStar FIDO (Rainbow catering)) does it this way - Anyone can post. But- until he PERSONALLY checks the complete text of the entry, no one can download it. Certified users can send mail that isn't intercepted by the sysop- and getting certified means name, address, signature, and ten bucks a year. By check. And he doesn't cash that check- he keeps it. You send him another check for whatever long-distance service you incur on FIDOmail. He suggests opening at $25 worth of credit. *That* check he cashes. This method (he feels) gives him an excellent handle on the situation. If your check bounces, you're an unreliable jerk and don't get an account. If your check clears, he has a way to point any lawsuits away from himself - namely, the account number and bank on that $10 check that he doesn't cash. But in any case, how can downloading a file put a BBS Sysop at legal risk- provided the file was rock-solid public domain in the first place? -Bill Yerazunis
meg@m-net.UUCP (Meg Geddes) (01/09/87)
In article <906@mhuxi.UUCP> crayinc@mhuxi.UUCP writes: > > If anyone has ever run a BBS they will find out quickly why you > can't leave it open. You get tired of Donald Duck, Goofy and the > the elfs leaving obsene messages or credit card numbers and info. > > The best are the neat little trojan horses which attempt to wipe > out the BBS or the hard disk of the unsuspecting person who calls > the totally open BBS and downloads that little jewel. > For what it's worth (and granted this is drift) I have run a bbs called netMeg for over a year now that is completely open to the public from the first call. Never had a serious problem yet. Obscene messages get deleted, all programs are tested if not by me, by someone, never had any illegal type messages, and the only nasty programs I get are occasional non-public domain ones which are deleted immediately. I believe I've had maybe two obscene messages on my board since I started it. So, for whatever reasons, it *can* work. I'm sorry others have not had this experience. -- Meg Geddes M-NET, Ann Arbor, Michigan {!ihnp4!itivax!m-net!meg} or {!ihnp4!chinet!meg} Don't take life so seriously... it ain't nohow permanent...
gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) (01/16/87)
> If anyone has ever run a BBS they will find out quickly why you > can't leave it open. You get tired of Donald Duck, Goofy and the > the elfs leaving obsene messages or credit card numbers and info. > The best are the neat little trojan horses which attempt to wipe > out the BBS or the hard disk of the unsuspecting person who calls > the totally open BBS and downloads that little jewel. > -- Rick Tillbrook I personally ran the PCNet ABBS system in San Francisco from about 1980-82. It sat in my bedroom closet. It was a fully open system. Don't tell me what it's like being a SYSOP. All the flamage I see is about people logging in with pseudonyms or to upload harmful things. The use of pseudonyms is utterly legal and is acceptable throughout society as a means of privacy protection (e.g. for authors or people in the public eye) but these guys have trouble with it. And I didn't want permission to upload a harmful program, I just wanted to read what was already uploaded by an "approved" user. My main point is that people should be able to access the information on the system without going through any rigamarole. I'm not saying that you should let people *insert* information into the system -- though even on the system in question, anyone can post or read a *message*, they just can't post or read a *piece of software*. Whether people can post is a local policy decision. But they should be able to read without hassle. If you don't let outsiders do anything useful, why advertise the phone number at all? Just give it out to your friends. But don't claim to be a public access BBS. -- John Gilmore {sun,ptsfa,lll-crg,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@ingres.berkeley.edu /* No comment */
cc743805@sju.UUCP (conway) (01/21/87)
In article <1669@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes: > >I personally ran the PCNet ABBS system in San Francisco from about 1980-82. >It sat in my bedroom closet. It was a fully open system. Don't tell me >what it's like being a SYSOP. Bravo! Another brave soul who wandered into the black-hole of Sysop-dom! >All the flamage I see is about people logging in with pseudonyms or to >upload harmful things. The use of pseudonyms is utterly legal and is >acceptable throughout society as a means of privacy protection (e.g. for >authors or people in the public eye) but these guys have trouble with it. >And I didn't want permission to upload a harmful program, I just wanted >to read what was already uploaded by an "approved" user. I run a BBS right now, and I let users use pseudo's if they want to (put it this way, my Co-SysOp's pseudo is 'The Flying Avodado'). Anyway, I have not really noticed that the messages on my system are any different from messages on no-pseudo BBS systems. The quality of the system depends on the quality of the operator(s). I let people upload and download whatever they want, with the express notice that nothing is guaranteed, and all downloading and subsequent program use is at their own risk. >[...] But they [BBS users] should be able to read without hassle. My users CAN read and post without hassle. Why shouldn't they? >If you don't let outsiders do anything useful, why advertise the phone >number at all? Just give it out to your friends. But don't claim to be >a public access BBS. My system is a public access system, and you can try it out for yourself, at 215/885-0182. 1200/300 baud (no that's not an advertisement). Take a look and see what a IBM BBS that lets people 'do their own thing' feels like. It is sort of a renegade system though - we only have 1 computer related discussion forum..... Chuck Conway ...!bpa!burdvax!sju!cc743805