jef@well.sf.ca.us (Jef Poskanzer) (07/23/90)
In the referenced message, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) wrote: }The trouble }with checksums is that most people would prefer a slightly mangled copy of }an article to no copy of the article. You're probably right about most people, but I'd guess that most people ~ at sites with more than one main feed would prefer junking mangled ~ articles. And all people everywhere would probably prefer that a ~ mangled copy get replaced by a good copy if one happens along somehow. --- Jef Jef Poskanzer jef@well.sf.ca.us {ucbvax, apple, hplabs}!well!jef Null message body; hope that's ok
zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us (Jon Zeeff) (07/25/90)
>}The trouble >}with checksums is that most people would prefer a slightly mangled copy of >}an article to no copy of the article. > >You're probably right about most people, but I'd guess that most people ~ >at sites with more than one main feed would prefer junking mangled ~ >articles. And all people everywhere would probably prefer that a ~ >mangled copy get replaced by a good copy if one happens along somehow. Maybe we need a "received but mangled" flag in the history file. -- Jon Zeeff (NIC handle JZ) zeeff@b-tech.ann-arbor.mi.us Dolphins! What about the tuna?
dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) (07/26/90)
I wrote a program called "brik" (see comp.sources.misc from last year) that is being used for checksums in a couple of newsgroups (comp.binaries.ibm.pc, comp.binaries.os2). It deals properly with lines of text, so that the checksum remains valid after newline conversions; it also gracefully allows for changes in headers, as only text following a Checksum: line is used. It's probably quite easy to incorporate a brik-like protocol into news. Somebody has to do it, though. -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com> UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi