help@kendra.kew.com (Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Help Desk) (09/11/90)
From article <1990Sep11.115623.6091@mp.cs.niu.edu>, by rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert): >>> UUPC/Extended version 1.08a is now available for the public. This >>> package is a small but *free* UUCP based mailer for connecting an MS-DOS >>> based PC to another PC or UNIX system. > > One question: Some earlier versions of UUPC allowed you to do wonderful > things such as > uucp myfile pcnode!/command.com > > Mail pcnode!/command.com > > Are these wonderful 'features' still available? Hmmm ... interesting question. The answer to the question may be yes; if it is, this is the last release of UUCP that will, because I promised someone yesterday that I would add a UUCP command to UUPC for the next release -- and if file transfers are supported, I have to secure the PC's root directory. (Actually, add a formal permissions file). By the way, stunts like the above example are why I don't keep my command.com in my root directory AND have three sets of backups for my hard drive. Also: I grabbed MUSH 6.5 off simtel20 and was reminded why I don't use it-- it is large enough to require overlays on MS-DOS, which kills performance. Nor is it will run on my PC, it complains my UUPC configuration file doesn't have a HOME directory -- which is a lie. I suspect a user problem (mine) on this latter item. Drew Derbyshire Internet: help@kendra.kew.com Snail mail: 108 Decatur St, Apt 9 Voice: 617-641-3739 Arlington, MA 02174
billg@cs.tamu.edu (William Gunshannon) (09/12/90)
In article <1990Sep11.164626.10348@news.clarkson.edu> help@kendra.kew.com (Drew Derbyshire - UUPC/extended Help Desk) writes: >From article <1990Sep11.115623.6091@mp.cs.niu.edu>, by rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert): >> One question: Some earlier versions of UUPC allowed you to do wonderful >> things such as >> uucp myfile pcnode!/command.com >> >> Mail pcnode!/command.com >> >> Are these wonderful 'features' still available? > >Hmmm ... interesting question. The answer to the question may be yes; >if it is, this is the last release of UUCP that will, because I >promised someone yesterday that I would add a UUCP command to UUPC for >the next release -- and if file transfers are supported, I have to >secure the PC's root directory. (Actually, add a formal permissions file). I would think that rather than trying to hack something into MSDOS that it doesn't support/understand (SECURITY), you would be much better off to make all file transfers INTO the PC go into a spooling directory (uucppublic), and leave the final disposition up to the PC user. There are other files that you probably don't want over-writen other than command.com (BIOS.SYS comes immediately to mind) and rather than trying to protect all these obscure files, I think it would be much easier to just put them all in one directory and have the user sort them out. Comments?? bill gunshannon bill@platypus.uofs.edu