ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) (09/14/90)
In article <7927@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: [ I wrote ] >> that the >> current UUCP channel does not invoke uux with the >> -aremote.domain!remote-user, > in fact this is the first time > I've ever heard of that option Maybe *that*'s why the option isn't exercised :-) Of course, for people like me who don't have an MMDF source license, but only binary from SCO ... :-) Ooops, actually I Steve K *did* write a license for my other site, so I suppose that's my excuse gone -- damn :-) Who's maintaining the uucp channel nowadays anyway ? > As to whether this is a problem? Sendmail sites generally have the > UUCP originator be `daemon' so I don't see how that's very different > from MMDF sites having the originator be `mmdf'. Can you explain further? Erm. I think I've had the From_ line be the -a user before in one weird configuration once, but I can't remember what it was. I do remember it happening though, which is why I thought it was the asme problem as the original poster's problem -- though I may be wrong on that point. > But all the rmail's I've seen simply scan > through From<space>'s and >From<space>'s and concatenate strings. So > where would this change be made?) I can't remember how it happened,, though I think that the delivery was done in a most peculiar way. Sorry :-( I can't make it happen anymore ... >>BTW is the mmdf2@relay.cs.net list active ? > Yes.. we've had a little discussion recently (this week) > So, anyway.. yes, there's been some activity. You should probably contact > mmdf2-request@relay.cs.net again.. Sigh. Perhaps I agitate for it to be gatewayed (one-way to avoid the wrath of the MMDF workers :-) into a newsgroup :-) > er.. ah.. I *am* an MMDF worker. The only one I've ever seen in comp.mail :-) ? :-( ? > MMDF assume > the ~/.signature file is suitable for the `phrase' part of the From: > line.. take a look at my .signature below ;-)) I've come across news posters that do that too :-( >-- The traffic on the mailing list has never been heavy enough to justify > a newsgroup. But having it there would inform bulk of MMDF using lurkers, which I think would be valuable. Other than in the UK, EUNet is generally against MMDF, which I think is a shame. I recently suggested that the new Egyptian backbone should look at using MMDF (which *I* consider the only viable option for use by beginner backbones) instead of smail 2.5, and people said MMDF ? Uggggghhhhhh! or words to that effect. Sigh. Information about the current mmdf work should help to keep the balance. I don't really see people using PP for quite a while yet -- I'd have to buy a new disc to unpack it :-) >-- There is a generally low opinion of MMDF which, as far as I can tell, > derives from Olden Days when MMDF was truly buggy. I was only a user in the days just about when MMDF II just came out, so I guess I'm too young to remember the bad old buggy days :-) > the documentation which is a bit lacking (sigh) .. And the sample tables which don't work at update #43 (flags=partial) Sigh. But then again, UCL only distributes update #21 -- I know, I only got a tape from them a couple of months ago :-( Then again, that's what the UK academic community use :-( > comp.mail.misc is just as good a place as any to talk about MMDF. If the > traffic warrants we might just be able to wangle a newsgroup ;-). We need a few more MMDF gurus. One David Herron isn't enough, really. Anyone else volunteering to help answer questions ? I'll volunteer to ask them :-) and I know a couple of others who would as well :-) -- my .signature is on holiday
chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) (09/14/90)
According to ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo): >I recently suggested that the new Egyptian backbone should look at >using MMDF (which *I* consider the only viable option for use by >beginner backbones) instead of smail 2.5... Note that Smail 3.1.19 would also make a dandy backbone mailer. -- Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT <chip@tct.uucp>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip>
ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) (09/16/90)
In article <74@raysnec.UUCP> shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: [ David Herron wrote: ] > >-- There is a generally low opinion of MMDF which, as far as I can tell, > > derives from Olden Days when MMDF was truly buggy. Nowadays it is very > > unbuggy, except in the documentation which is a bit lacking (sigh) .. > Tell us another one, David! (Nothing personal... David *did* try to help > solve *our* problem.) The "officially supported" MMDF II found in SCO UNIX > (we have ODT 1.0) on our system remains truly unreliable. Yup, it's certainly not David's fault -- I think he's even given SCO free help -- the world needs more DSHs, but then this *is* the first time SCO have done anything with MMDF, and I would argue that when they get it right, it will prove to have been the right choice. And this brings up another point, The shipping of MMDF by a major vendor like SCO is one other reason to draw the MMDF discussion on USENET together, especially since anyone who tries to muck with SCO's mailers may well get bitten by their nasty so-called "security" <expletive deleted> and would be well advised to stick with MMDF for that reason. Mail suppliers like Ray, of course are free to do whatthey like, but we aren't all in that business! My suggestion for an MMDF group has met with some positive and no negative response, so I'll probably send out an official CALL FOR DISCUSSION sometime in the next wek or two -- I need a few days to read the official guidelines first :-) Any mail on that issue will be very welcome, whether +ve or -ve. -- my .signature is on holiday
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR/KT) (09/17/90)
As quoted from <1990Sep15.212508.11866@robobar.co.uk> by ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo): +--------------- | In article <74@raysnec.UUCP> shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes: | > Tell us another one, David! (Nothing personal... David *did* try to help | > solve *our* problem.) The "officially supported" MMDF II found in SCO UNIX | > (we have ODT 1.0) on our system remains truly unreliable. | | Yup, it's certainly not David's fault -- I think he's even given SCO free help | -- the world needs more DSHs, but then this *is* the first time | SCO have done anything with MMDF, and I would argue that when they get it | right, it will prove to have been the right choice. +--------------- In the meantime: I used that little patch to disable security (c2 -> d) and then dropped MMDF II #43 into place. It works fine, as does MH 6.7 which I installed afterward (with a small hack, pending a response from comp.mail.mh on a small anomaly I found using the mmdf2 MTS). (Well, MH 6.7 works almost fine; I still get core dumps when I use a repl filter, and vmh loves to dump core, but vmh has never worked under System V and repl filters screw up on the ACS-1000 using "sendmail/smtp" MTS (actually using a small program that speaks SMTP and interfaces with smail).) I STRONGLY recommend FTP'ing MMDF II #43 from louie.udel.edu, if only to get the manuals. SCO left most of them out, which makes it really difficult to configure a working system. For anyone who wants to install MMDF on SCO UNIX, I can provide the various configuration files that I used. I can also provide a small patch to one of the rcvdir programs that enables it to work with SCO's setuid-"terminal" tty mechanism; but this is trivial, as the code necessary is already in place. (4.3BSD uses the same method.) ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery VHF/UHF: KB8JRR/KT on 220, 2m, 440 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN America OnLine: KB8JRR AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery Delphi: ALLBERY