micky@osu-eddie.UUCP (07/09/87)
From: Mayank Choudhary <micky> Hi! Our site only received the uu* segment 02 of 02 for PkARC 3.5, you had sent across the net on the 4th July. Could some one possibly, either repost part 01/02 or maybe send me a copy. Cheers micky Netmail: micky@ohio-state.ARPA @tut.cis.ohio-state.edu @mad.cis.ohio-state.edu
kad@ttrdc.UUCP (Keith Drescher) (07/10/87)
In article <3780@osu-eddie.UUCP> micky@osu-eddie.UUCP writes:
From: Mayank Choudhary <micky>
Hi!
Our site only received the uu* segment 02 of 02 for PkARC 3.5, you had sent
across the net on the 4th July. Could some one possibly, either repost part 01/02 or maybe send me a copy.
WE only got 2 of 2 too, could some ne please mail a copy of part
1 of 2?
THanks, Keith Drescher ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!kad
--
Keith Drescher (kad@ttrdc) | ... You can check out any
AT&T | time you like - but you can
Computer Systems Division, Skokie, Il. | never leave ...
PATH: ...!ihnp4!ttrdc!kad | - Hotel Californiarosenz@cg-atlas.UUCP (Elizabeth Rosenzweig X5537) (07/10/87)
I also only recieved the 2nd of 2 postings in comp.binaries.ibm.pc for PKARC 3.5. Could you please repost or send it to me thank you Elizabeth Rosenzweig Kinchen --------------------------------- decvax!cg-atlas!rosenz
tfra@ur-tut.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (07/11/87)
[Et tu, line-eater?] Our site only received part 2, also. Could you please repost part 1? There seems to be enough interest. Thanks. -- Tom Frauenhofer ...!seismo!rochester!ur-tut!tfra "The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -- Harlan Ellison
tan@ihlpg.UUCP (07/11/87)
In article <1809@ttrdc.UUCP>, kad@ttrdc.UUCP (Keith Drescher) writes: > In article <3780@osu-eddie.UUCP> micky@osu-eddie.UUCP writes: > From: Mayank Choudhary <micky> > Our site only received the uu* segment 02 of 02 for PkARC 3.5, you had sent > across the net on the 4th July. Could some one possibly, either > repost part 01/02 or maybe send me a copy. > WE only got 2 of 2 too, could some ne please mail a copy of part > 1 of 2? > THanks, Keith Drescher ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!kad -------------------- We only got part 2 of 2 also. I would here ask the moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc to please repost part 1 of PKARC 3.5. I am a new PC owner and new reader of these groups who just missed the June posting of PKARC. I'm sitting here with many archived binaries that I can't use and patiently waited weeks for the monthly posting in July. I'll go crazy if I have to wait another month for the August posting. P.S. Just in case he does not repost, would someone mail me a copy, too? Thanks in advance. -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan
fmb@ihaxa.UUCP (07/12/87)
I also only received part 2/2 of PKARC. Please repost part 1/2 Thanks
randy@chinet.UUCP (Randy Suess) (07/12/87)
In article <422@ihaxa.ATT.COM> fmb@ihaxa.ATT.COM (Botelho) writes: > >I also only received part 2/2 of PKARC. Please repost part 1/2 > >Thanks I received both postings just fine, so, please don't re-post. At least, make sure the reposting doesn't go thru *my* machine and the systems I feed. I really can't understand all these "*I* didn't get foo 27/45, please repost". How bout "I didn't get foo 27/45. Whatever site along my newsfeed path that broke the postings, *please* fix *your* machine and arrange for me to get the missing posting?" That mite best be done via email, also. Re: PKARK, it is posted once a month, so you only have a few more weeks until the official posting is repeated. -- that's the biz, sweetheart..... Randy Suess ..!ihnp4!chinet!randy
tan@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Bill Tanenbaum) (07/13/87)
In article <1299@chinet.UUCP>, randy@chinet.UUCP (Randy Suess) writes:
< I received both postings just fine, so, please don't re-post.
^
^ ^
^ ^
< At least, make sure the reposting doesn't go thru *my* machine and the
< systems I feed.
< I really can't understand all these "*I* didn't get foo 27/45,
< please repost". How bout "I didn't get foo 27/45. Whatever site along
< my newsfeed path that broke the postings, *please* fix *your* machine
< and arrange for me to get the missing posting?" That mite best be
< done via email, also.
--------------------
Pardon? If the site along the newsfeed path who broke the postings
knew who it was, the above message would be unnecessary. If the
site does not know that it broke it, the above message would
be useless. Also, how is the hapless non-recipient supposed to know
where the break is?
As for PKARC 3.5, MANY people did not get part 1. Reposting
sounds to me a lot less complicated than what you suggest.
--
Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tanrandy@chinet.UUCP (Randy Suess) (07/15/87)
In article <3439@ihlpg.ATT.COM> tan@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Bill Tanenbaum) writes: >In article <1299@chinet.UUCP>, randy@chinet.UUCP (Randy Suess) writes: >< I received both postings just fine, so, please don't re-post. >-------------------- >Pardon? If the site along the newsfeed path who broke the postings >knew who it was, the above message would be unnecessary. If the >As for PKARC 3.5, MANY people did not get part 1. Reposting >sounds to me a lot less complicated than what you suggest. Huh? Repost a largish file that will be reposted once a month anyway? What is to say that the same people won't miss it again? Again, if a person/site missed receiving some large article that the majority of the world *did* receive, I believe that a request for some site/person to mail the file to them would suffice. I guess I just can't understand why a *few* people missing a post automatically justifies sending the file all over the world again. -- that's the biz, sweetheart..... Randy Suess ..!ihnp4!chinet3rdenar
cliff@rlgvax.UUCP (Cliff Joslyn) (07/15/87)
In article <1809@ttrdc.UUCP>, kad@ttrdc.UUCP (Keith Drescher) writes: > In article <3780@osu-eddie.UUCP> micky@osu-eddie.UUCP writes: > From: Mayank Choudhary <micky> > > Our site only received the uu* segment 02 of 02 for PkARC 3.5, you had sent > across the net on the 4th July. Could some one possibly, either repost part 01/02 or maybe send me a copy. > > WE only got 2 of 2 too, could some ne please mail a copy of part > 1 of 2? Us too. Pleas re-post. food for mailer food for mailer food for mailer food for mailer -- O-----------------------------------------------------------------------> | Cliff Joslyn, Computer Consoles Inc., Reston, Virgnia, but my opinions. | UUCP: ..!seismo!rlgvax!cliff V All the world is biscuit shaped
tan@ihlpg.ATT.COM (Bill Tanenbaum) (07/15/87)
< >In article <1299@chinet.UUCP>, randy@chinet.UUCP (Randy Suess) writes:
< >< I received both postings just fine, so, please don't re-post.
< >--------------------
< >As for PKARC 3.5, MANY people did not get part 1. Reposting
< >sounds to me a lot less complicated than what you suggest.
< >--------------------
< Huh? Repost a largish file that will be reposted once
< a month anyway? What is to say that the same people won't miss
< it again? Again, if a person/site missed receiving some large
< article that the majority of the world *did* receive, I believe
< that a request for some site/person to mail the file to them would
< suffice.
< I guess I just can't understand why a *few* people missing
< a post automatically justifies sending the file all over the
< world again.
<---------
It doesn't automatically justify anything. The moderator has final say.
If he does not wish to repost, fine. I merely suggested that since people
from MANY different sites did not receive part 1 of PKARC/PKXARC 3.5
that a reposting be considered.
I also requested someone to email me part 1 (in case it was not reposted).
I got ZERO copies in the mail. So much for that idea.
I finally found someone who works down the hall here at the labs who had
a copy. So I don't care any more.
--
Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tanhannu@tut.UUCP (Hannu Koivisto) (07/22/87)
In article <444@cg-atlas.UUCP>, rosenz@cg-atlas.UUCP (Elizabeth Rosenzweig X5537) writes: >> I also only recieved the 2nd of 2 postings in comp.binaries.ibm.pc for >> PKARC 3.5. >> Could you please repost or send it to me > Hannu Koivisto ...mcvax!tut!hannu or hannu@tut.fi