gmark@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Stewart) (03/18/88)
I've gotten a copy of Honey-DanBer UUCP. I see that it appears to display the blocks transmitted as it works, which is nice. However, what are the other advantages? I'm told it's "not even worth fixing" the standard UUCP after having HDB. Is HDB more dependable? (I've got a devil of a time with long transmissions/receipts over phone lines from home. Are any UUCPs "restartable" such that they can figure out where they left off if interrupted?) Thanks in advance. G. Mark Stewart I will log off and wait for my answer. ATT-BTL Naperville, ix1g266 ixlpq!gms 979-0914
lenny@icus.UUCP (Lenny Tropiano) (03/20/88)
In article <4039@ihlpf.ATT.COM> gmark@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Stewart) writes: |>I've gotten a copy of Honey-DanBer UUCP. I see that it appears to |>display the blocks transmitted as it works, which is nice. However, |>what are the other advantages? I'm told it's "not even worth fixing" |>the standard UUCP after having HDB. Is HDB more dependable? (I've |>got a devil of a time with long transmissions/receipts over |>phone lines from home. Are any UUCPs "restartable" such that they |>can figure out where they left off if interrupted?) Thanks in advance. |> |> I don't want to start another why doesn't AT&T give out HDB war... but to answer this question HDB is much better than the standard UUCP that comes with the UNIX PC. Some of the advantages gained are: o Nicer user interface. You can tell what jobs are in the queue with a "uustat -a" and it gives you the COMPLETE detail, not just the JOB QUEUED message. o Much better administrative control, ability to handle permissions of the uucico processes a lot more extensively. o Ability to schedule uucp Polls, without the aid of crontabs to trigger the uucico for a specific system. o Ability to handle complex uucp requests, like "uucp file nodea!nodeb!nodec!~/" as long as you have permission to do this at all the intermediate sites. And they are all running HDB. o More complex Systems entries are capable of being created. o Much better error recovery. It is smart enough to check the FREE space and send back a NAK to the system to abort sending the files. o uucp-cleanup is more complete, it gives explicit details (once a week or more if desired) of UUCP denied messages, etc.. HDB seems to be *MORE* dependable (sorry folks) than the generic UUCP. As for restartable, the uucp's (I think all do) when the call the system again, after abnormally aborting the transfer, will resend the current job it was working on, and all subsequent jobs. It won't RESEND the ones it sent already. -Lenny -- US MAIL : Lenny Tropiano, ICUS Computer Group IIIII CCC U U SSS PO Box 1 I C U U S Islip Terrace, New York 11752 I C U U SS PHONE : (516) 968-8576 [H] (516) 582-5525 [W] I C U U S TELEX : 154232428 [ICUS] IIIII CCC UUU SSS AT&T MAIL: ...attmail!icus!lenny UUCP : ...{mtune, ihnp4, boulder, talcott, sbcs, bc-cis}!icus!lenny
edward@engr.uky.edu (Edward C. Bennett) (03/23/88)
In article <302@icus.UUCP> lenny@icus.UUCP (Lenny Tropiano) writes: > >I don't want to start another why doesn't AT&T give out HDB war... but >to answer this question HDB is much better than the standard UUCP that >comes with the UNIX PC. Do you suppose that there is any way of convincing AT&T to release HDB for 3B1's? What if we ALL wrote and asked? Could they ignore thousands of users? -- Edward C. Bennett DOMAIN: edward@engr.uky.edu UUCP: {cbosgd|uunet}!ukma!ukecc!edward "Goodnight M.A." BITNET: edward%ukecc.uucp@ukma "He's become a growling, snarling white-hot mass of canine terror"