csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (05/04/88)
[Why the bizarre cross-posting? Followups to comp.unix.{wizards,uucp}.]
In article <44299@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes:
>It's pretty pitiful that Sun makes this a seperate product (read extra cost
>to the customer) instead of making it part of the standard uucp they provide.
We've come full circle -- back to my original grousing four weeks ago that I
couldn't believe that Sun wasn't supporting UUCP X.25. It isn't in the SunOS
release because Sun's only UUCP guru (Bill Shannon) hasn't been given time to
do it. So the German consulting group did it. Granted adding 'f' protocol is
easy; adding all the SunLink support is not. And since the consulting groups
have their own budget and costs to justify, they charge for their work.
Note that only a handful of vendors provide 'f' support at all.
I'm treading on eggshells here, too; there is a strong sentiment at Pyramid
that we should start unbundling things that have value added, like X.25 UUCP.
I'm more the traditional UNIX hacker, rather adverse to charging for standards
that benefit the entire community. But giving everything away tends to lead to
cashflow problems. :-(
<csg>rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (05/04/88)
It wouldn't bother me if the various vendors marketing would stop claiming "BSD compatibility". The current BSD release supports the UUCP 'f' protocol and SLIP for TCP/IP, yet most "compatible" vendors don't support it. A non-trivial number of customers are surprised when they find things like that are not supported. Especially those who also have a "real" BSD system. Some of the vendors rationalize it by saying that they are 4.2BSD compatible. (including all of the 4.2bsd bugs in some cases). Why don't they keep System V.1 compatibility? Anyone who really wants BSD compatibility wants the CURRENT BSD system, but a 5 year old version. They seem to realize it for System V, why can't they make the same obvious conclusion. --rick
bob@cloud9.UUCP (Bob Toxen) (05/06/88)
In article <44300@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>, rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: > The current BSD release supports the UUCP 'f' protocol and SLIP for TCP/IP, > yet most "compatible" vendors don't support it. > > --rick While they're at it, Sun and friends (enemies?) should fix UUCICO to support 4.2BSD UUCP's ability to specify ODD or EVEN parity when dialing into the remote system. We could have used this feature. Also, Sun's UUCICO faults if there isn't a "send" sequence after the last "expect" sequence or if any "send" sequence consists solely of "\c". There's also a third case where it faults. I could look it up if anyone cares. This was a year ago, maybe it's fixed by now. -- Bob Toxen {ucbvax!ihnp4,harvard,cloud9!es}!anvil!cavu!bob Stratus Computer, Marlboro, MA Pilot to Copilot: What's a mountain goat doing way up here in a cloud bank?
gerry@syntron.UUCP (G. Roderick Singleton) (05/09/88)
In article <353@cloud9.UUCP> bob@cloud9.UUCP (Bob Toxen) writes: <In article <44300@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>, rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) writes: <> The current BSD release supports the UUCP 'f' protocol and SLIP for TCP/IP, <> yet most "compatible" vendors don't support it. <> <> --rick < <While they're at it, Sun and friends (enemies?) should fix UUCICO to <support 4.2BSD UUCP's ability to specify ODD or EVEN parity when dialing <into the remote system. We could have used this feature. Also, Sun's <UUCICO faults if there isn't a "send" sequence after the last "expect" <sequence or if any "send" sequence consists solely of "\c". There's also <a third case where it faults. I could look it up if anyone cares. This was <a year ago, maybe it's fixed by now. <-- < <Bob Toxen {ucbvax!ihnp4,harvard,cloud9!es}!anvil!cavu!bob <Stratus Computer, Marlboro, MA <Pilot to Copilot: What's a mountain goat doing way up here in a cloud bank? In every version of uucico I've encountered, there are some poorly documented features, even for UNIX, that will perform exactly what you're looking to accomplish. Try inserting P_ZERO in the first send sequence (or P_EVEN or whatever) in your L.sys entry. You'll be amazed it actually works and it's already built-in. Now I have yet to personally experience SUN uucico but all the others, 4.2, v7 and SCO Xenix2.1.3, can set parity this way and I expect that SUN's version also has this capability. I know these exist in the sources but I can't locate an external reference as I type this so just experiment. gerry -- G. Roderick Singleton, gerry@{ syntron | geac | eclectic | cansun }.UUCP "ALL animals are created equal, BUT some animals are MORE equal than others." George Orwell