[comp.sys.att] uucico

wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (01/20/88)

Hi,

Several people have asked me to email / post the patched up version
of uucico that reputedly fixes problems in version 3.51.  I didn't
want to seem calous by not responding, so I thought I'd answer
collectively via the Net.

I read over my license agreement, trying to decide what to do.
There is an interesting paradox in paragraphs 3A and 3B of the
agreement.

3A basically says that you have 90 days to seek
replacement of software that is "not in good woking order".  OK,
fair enough I guess...

However... 3B says that AT&T doesn't promise that the sofware "meet
your requirements, or that the SOFTWARE operation will be
error-free or uninterupted".  In other words, they don't guarantee
anything other than Unix will occupy disk space, if even that.

I wonder just what "good working order" is?

Anyway, I guess that means that they don't promise that uucico
won't crash while it is running.  That could explain some apparent
obstinance of the Hotline, since giving out patches and fixes
really would be an act of courtesty rather than a requirement as
defined by the license.  Thus, I appreciate the help I have
received very much.  What puzzles me is why I talked the friendly
(and I really honestly mean that) people at the hotline into
sending me a copy and some people are still being told that the
hotline never heard of such a bug in uucico.

I guess the best thing is to be very firm and very polite, and
explain very, very explicitly what is the matter and explain
exactly what correlates the crashes.  It took me three calls
blaming uucico.  They did keep track of the "tickets" and I got
action after the third consecutive complaint about uucico.  Also
mention that you have been following this discussion on Usenet to
the engineer that handles your call.  Some of them read Usenet.



Now my dilema is that I'd like the people (whom I assume have
legitimately purchased ver 3.51) who have asked me for the patch to
be able to have it, but my license says that I can't share my
software without (presumably) massive red tape...  But since the
patched uucico sort of "mysteriously" showed up on my mahcine via
email, I don't know whether it is part of the licensed software
that makes up ver 3.51, or in some other fashion is property of
AT&T.

Anybody at AT&T know?  If there is a consensus I'll post it or
email as is appropriate.  But I want to be careful lest the fone
police get after me (remember the movie _The_President's_Men_ or
whatever it was called?).


--Bill Mayhew
...!cbosgd!neoucom!impulse!wtm

stox@ttrde.UUCP (Kenneth P. Stox) (01/23/88)

In article <960@neoucom.UUCP>, wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes:
> email as is appropriate.  But I want to be careful lest the fone
> police get after me (remember the movie _The_President's_Men_ or
					  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
					The Presidents Analyst ???
> whatever it was called?).


==========================================================

Ken Stox	**	630 Software Development Group

			AT&T Skokie, Illinois
ihnp4!ttrde!stox
==========================================================

rjg@sialis.mn.org (Robert J. Granvin) (01/24/88)

In article <960@neoucom.UUCP> wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) writes:
>Hi,

Howdy do.

>I wonder just what "good working order" is?

I personally note that the keyword is "working".  If it just doesn't
work (which to me also includes "it works, but it just toasts the hell
outta your machine...") I feel that I'm entitled to some adequate
service and effort to be provided with an item that "works".  However,
I'm sure that if argued, I'd lose.  :-)

>Anyway, I guess that means that they don't promise that uucico
>won't crash while it is running.  That could explain some apparent
>obstinance of the Hotline, since giving out patches and fixes
>really would be an act of courtesty rather than a requirement as
>defined by the license.  Thus, I appreciate the help I have
>received very much.  What puzzles me is why I talked the friendly
>(and I really honestly mean that) people at the hotline into
>sending me a copy and some people are still being told that the
>hotline never heard of such a bug in uucico.
>
>I guess the best thing is to be very firm and very polite, and
>explain very, very explicitly what is the matter and explain
>exactly what correlates the crashes.  It took me three calls
>blaming uucico.  They did keep track of the "tickets" and I got
>action after the third consecutive complaint about uucico.  Also
>mention that you have been following this discussion on Usenet to
>the engineer that handles your call.  Some of them read Usenet.

I can relate.  :-)

Another approach is the approach I took.  Not only did I explain my
problem very very clearly, and explicitly (more than the third time),
but I also explained very clearly that I know the hotline has a
patched uucico available, and I strongly suspected that this new
uucico will solve my problems.  I also politely and firmly requested
that I be sent this thing.  That afternoon, it was downloaded to my
machine.  Yes, the hotline is very helpful (and friendly (most of the
time... :-)), but the major problem is sometimes you have to tell
_them_ exactly what you want.  Just identifying the problem may not
get you a solution.  Fortunately, the net really helps people out.
When you find a problem with the 3b1, and you also find a solution,
it's not a bad idea to post it.  That way you can call and request a
specific item.  That way you're sure to receive it.

I want to thank you for posting the information originally about this
uucico.  I've been calling the hotline for 5 months with a customary
response of "we know of no problems in uucico".  When asked if any
fixdisks or other software patches are available for system 3.51, the
response is the customary "Patches are available for 3.5.  However, we
have no problems reported under 3.51, and no fixdisks are available or
announced at this time."

By the way.  I'm running the new uucico.  Where I used to have a
normal average up time of 3.5 days, I'm now running at my ninth day of
straight up time.  The previous record was 6.5 days.  It appears to
solve a lot of problems at this point.  In addition, the patched
uucico from the hotline also returns to the philosophy of uucico under
at least version 3.5.  It will not activate the modem speaker when it
performs a dial.  You might consider this point alone as being worth
the reasons to call and get the new uucico.  :-)

-- 
 _____________________________________________________________________________
| Robert J. Granvin      | INTERNET:       rjg@sialis.mn.org |                |
| 2701 West 43rd Street  | UUCP:  ...ihnp4!meccts!sialis!rjg |   "Whoops!!"   |
| Minneapolis, MN  55410 |   ...uunet!rosevax!ems!sialis!rjg |________________|