anderson@csli.Stanford.EDU (Steve Anderson) (11/27/89)
I apologize for this further expenditure of net bandwidth on the burning question of whether or not White Knight is capable of autoreceiving ZModem file transfers, but there actually is a problem and I hope someone can sort it out on the basis of a little more information. In a recent posting to comp.sys.mac (as well as in a personal note to me), Norm Goodger explains what WK expects a UN*X host running sz to send as the message to initiate a ZModem file transfer: norm>When I type sz filename (CR) on my unix system, it sends the following norm> norm>rz norm>**B000000000000 (The "norm>" at the beginning of each line here is inserted so that those of you reading this with WK won't see your macs go into autoreceive mode - it's not something transmitted by sz!) He goes on to say that when WK sees this string, norm>WK instantly opens the file transfer dialog and begins downloading norm>the file. I understand there are a variety of versions of Chuck's zmodem norm>out there, we have 2.10 here, and I read a previous msg that someone had norm>2.12 installed at their site. While I would assume that they should all norm>work the same, perhaps this is not the case. Now in fact, those of us who have been complaining that WK won't autoreceive ZModem transfers have reason to believe he is correct on at least the first count, because (as a couple of postings have indicated), our machines running WK go spontaneously (and inappropriately) into autoreceive mode when reading Norm's message. However, he is also correct in saying that perhaps not all zmodem programs on UN*X hosts work the same. In fact, the most common version of the rz/sz package to be found on these hosts is the one that appeared some time ago in comp.sources.unix. That's version 1.34. I'm currently using a slightly later version myself (1.44, dated 3/3/88), but as far as this question is concerned it's the same as the widely distributed 1.34. The point is that when I issue an sz command on my Sun to initiate the transfer of a small file, what gets sent is: me>sz: 1 file 62976 bytes 1.3 minutes me>**B00000000000000 (again, the line prefix "me>" is intended to keep those of you running a communications program that recognizes THIS string from having it go into a strange state while reading this message). Notice the two differences: (a) "rz" vs."sz: (file transfer data)", and (b) number of 0's (12 vs. 14). Now ZTerm (0.8, 0.85) recognizes this string and goes into autoreceivemode. On the other hand, I can read Norm's message with ZTerm just fine, and the control sequence in it doesn't set off autoreceive. This might be because either (a) ZTerm is smarter than WK about when to look for a "receive ZModem transfer" command, though this seems unlikely; or (b) the two programs are looking for different commands, which seems the most reasonable explanation. I've been unable to locate a copy of sz version 2.XX to see if it sends something that ZTerm understands. So the problem that has been widely reported would seem to come down to the definition of the zmodem protocol (what string does a server send to initiate a transfer?), and to the extent to which various mac implementations (ZTerm and WK, in particular) are based on the same definition. I have no idea where to look for the "official" standard, just as I have no idea where to find a more recent version of sz. I must also confess that I haven't spent enough time looking at the sz sources to sort out exactly what constants are responsible for what it sends. I hope someone else can add further clarification. On another (related) note, I complained in a previous posting that when I did get a ZModem transfer going, no "File Transfer Status" window appeared. Norm pointed out in his message to me that various INITs that muck with the WDEFs can cause this. I confirmed that it was WindChooser that was causing the problem; when I replaced this with the recently posted NeXT-color-wdef INIT, everything worked fine. Steve Anderson Cognitive Science Center The Johns Hopkins University anderson@sapir.cog.jhu.edu anderson@cs.jhu.edu anderson@csli.stanford.edu
davea@kgw2.UUCP (Dave Alverson) (11/29/89)
In article <11143@csli.Stanford.EDU>, anderson@csli.Stanford.EDU (Steve Anderson) writes: > > Now ZTerm (0.8, 0.85) recognizes this string and goes into > autoreceivemode. On the other hand, I can read Norm's message with > ZTerm just fine, and the control sequence in it doesn't set off > autoreceive. This might be because either (a) ZTerm is smarter than WK > about when to look for a "receive ZModem transfer" command, though this > seems unlikely; or (b) the two programs are looking for different > commands, which seems the most reasonable explanation. I've been unable From what I've read here, seems that WK is looking for the wrong things. The 'rz' should not be used as part of the trigger. This is just something that the sending program may send as a convenience (eg, when connected to a unix system, to start the rz program). Also, there is a control char between the ** and the B. Since norm's message triggered WK, it doesnt seem to care if that control char is there or not. -- Dave -- Dave Alverson, author of ZTerm, Mason, OH
grw@cartan.math.hawaii.edu (George R. Wilkens) (11/30/89)
Hi Guys, I found version 3.xx of rz/sz in the simtel20 archives. Their address is Name: WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL Address: 26.2.0.74 Aliases: simtel20.arpa When you anonymous login to simtel20, just do the following ftp> cd PD2:<UNIX-C.XYZMODEM> ftp> tenex ftp> get RZSZ0525.TAR-Z ftp> bye You need the tenex to download a binary file to a UN*X system, since simtel20 is a VMS system. Once you get the file, just move it to RZSZ0525.TAR.Z, uncompress it and tar it. The simtel20 archives have lots of good stuff in them. To get more information about the archives, get a few text files from the login directory. You should ftp> get 00-README.TXT ftp> get SIMTEL20-MACINTOSH.INFO ftp> get SIMTEL20-UNIX-C.INFO for starters. Good luck everybody! --George ----------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- George Wilkens | Department of Mathematics | INTERNET: grw@kahuna.math.hawaii.edu 2565 The Mall | BITNET: grw@uhccux.bitnet University of Hawaii Manoa | ARPA: grw%uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu@rutgers.edu Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 | Phone: (808) 948-6095 ----------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------+-------------------------------------------------- George Wilkens | Department of Mathematics | INTERNET: grw@kahuna.math.hawaii.edu 2565 The Mall | BITNET: grw@uhccux.bitnet
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery) (12/01/89)
As quoted from <5574@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> by grw@cartan.math.hawaii.edu (George R. Wilkens): +--------------- | You need the tenex to download a binary file to a UN*X system, since simtel20 | is a VMS system. Once you get the file, just move it to RZSZ0525.TAR.Z, +--------------- Minor nitpick: VMS doesn't require the "tenex" command. The command is named after the OS it supports: "ten-ex", for TOPS10-extended. This is one of a family of operating systems (TOPS-10, Tenex, Tops-20, and Twenex) for the DEC PDP-10 mainframe. The reason it's provided is that the PDP-10 has 36-bit words which don't cleanly split into bytes; ASCII files are stored as 5 7-bit characters per word + 1 spare bit, while octet-oriented binary files are stored as 4 8-bit characters per word + 4 spare bits. The "tenex" command causes ftp to unpack the files properly; "ascii" would do it wrong, and "binary" (AKA "image") doesn't unpack bytes at all. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi) uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp *(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)* *Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)* expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
pollock@ziggy.EDU (Wayne Pollock) (12/02/89)
I think I'm onto something. There are two networks to attach to my
local unix host from the dialer. Now on either network, ZTERM 0.80 can
auto-receive. However, only on one of them can WK auto-receive! This is
the same host, same login, same WK session -- I can hit three pluses, dial
in, use network #1 to my (same) login, and WK wit auto-receive quite
happily. (Well, almost; the status box doesn't show effieiency, "of" size
(this is the total size of the file), or the percentage. In these fields
WK displays "???".) Three pluses, login to network #2, WK refuses to auto-
receive.
I am just guessing, but I think that some unix systems (or the attached
network) are translating linefeeds and carrage-returns. From the WK manual,
it seems that WK needs the string "rz^M" and not "rz^J". Other control
characters may be stuffed in there two.
If so, then perhaps using a pre-emulation filter to strip out the ^Js might
work. Can anybody out there test this (or rule it out as a cause)? Also,
does anybody know why WK doesn't seem to know the size of the file it's
downloading?
Wayne Pollock (The MAD Scientist) pollock@ziggy.usf.edu
Usenet: ...!{gatech!uflorida!}ziggy!pollock
GEnie: W.POLLOCKngg@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM (Norman Goodger) (12/05/89)
In article <1294@ziggy.EDU> pollock@ziggy.cmd.usf.edu.UUCP (Wayne Pollock) writes: >I am just guessing, but I think that some unix systems (or the attached >network) are translating linefeeds and carrage-returns. From the WK manual, >it seems that WK needs the string "rz^M" and not "rz^J". Other control >characters may be stuffed in there two. >If so, then perhaps using a pre-emulation filter to strip out the ^Js might >work. Can anybody out there test this (or rule it out as a cause)? Also, >does anybody know why WK doesn't seem to know the size of the file it's >downloading? Version 11.02 update which was just released by Freesoft changes the way that Auto_receive in zmodem works. It will work now whether you have Auto_Receive enabled or not, unless you change a PUTPARAM to give yourself the option to Auto_Recieve. There were a variety of other fixes in 11.02. However the size of the update file makes it a little difficult to post in comp.binaries.mac without breaking it into a dozen pieces because stuffed its still almost 300K and there are 2 files, one for 11.0 to 11.02 and one for 11.01 to 11.02 depending on which you received on your master disk is the one that you will need. I posted a msg from Scott last Friday that indicates however that you can send your WK Master back to Freesoft for a free update to the latest version of WK 11. Should you not have access to GEnie or a BBS that has the update files posted. Should you send your Master disk off to FreeSoft to update in this manner, I would suggest that you send it in some method that allows insurance so that if in the remote chance that it gets lost, you have a way to be compensated. -- Norm Goodger SysOp - MacInfo BBS @415-795-8862 3Com Corp. Co-SysOp FreeSoft RT - GEnie. Enterprise Systems Division (I disclaim anything and everything) UUCP: {3comvax,auspex,sun}!bridge2!ngg Internet: ngg@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM
gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (12/13/89)
Re: WK 11.02 zmodem auto-receive.
So what is the verdict? Who has white knight 11.02? Does it really
cure all the problems with zmodem auto-receive? Is it as fast as
zterm? Zterm works so well, I am tempted to get WK and convert all my
RR9.4 scripts to use zmodem, since 9.4 kermit & my unix kermit seem to
misbehave around byte #65K on large uploads.
I need to know if Scott Watson has fixed all the WK 11.02 problems.
Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois
1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801
ARPA: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!uiucdcs!gilliesallbery@ncoast.org (Brandon S. Allbery) (12/13/89)
In article <8400198@m.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes:
So what is the verdict? Who has white knight 11.02? Does it really
cure all the problems with zmodem auto-receive? Is it as fast as
zterm? Zterm works so well, I am tempted to get WK and convert all my
RR9.4 scripts to use zmodem, since 9.4 kermit & my unix kermit seem to
misbehave around byte #65K on large uploads.
I don't have 11.02 (yet), but I can give some timings on ZTerm vs. WK 11.01:
On a large (500K) file, ZTerm gets 96-98% efficiency. WK gets 92% efficiency.
Of course, each of these efficiencies is as measured by the programs
themselves, and they may not use the same method to calculate it. Caveat user.
++Brandon
--
Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi)
uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp
*(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)*
*Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)*
expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.
--
Brandon S. Allbery allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi)
uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp
*(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)*
*Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)*
expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization. Mail me for info.malczews@aludra.usc.edu (Frank Malczewski) (12/16/89)
In article <8400198@m.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >Re: WK 11.02 zmodem auto-receive. > >So what is the verdict? Who has white knight 11.02? Does it really >cure all the problems with zmodem auto-receive? Is it as fast as >zterm? Zterm works so well, I am tempted to get WK and convert all my >RR9.4 scripts to use zmodem, since 9.4 kermit & my unix kermit seem to >misbehave around byte #65K on large uploads. > >I need to know if Scott Watson has fixed all the WK 11.02 problems. > > >Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois >1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801 >ARPA: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!uiucdcs!gillies The verdict is: Except for a bit of overuse of the Chicago font all over the place ;-) that White Knight 11.02 is ALMOST as good as ZTerm 0.85. Scott has done quite a good job, overall. However, I have had problems with zmodem downloads that get interrupted by the sending computer (in two cases), where after restarting the download, when completed, the file was not useable. I believe that in both cases the files were not MacBinary format (I usually compress files on unix and decompress on Mac). I have never had this occur with ZTerm, circumstances being the same. Both, by the way, are comparable in speed. x x x x -- -- Frank Malczewski (malczews@girtab.usc.edu)