From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Oct 3 10:42:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA00221 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 10:42:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elvis.vnet.net (elvis.vnet.net [166.82.1.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA00212 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 10:42:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ponds.dignus.com (ponds.vnet.net [166.82.177.48]) by elvis.vnet.net (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id NAA15043; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:42:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lakes.dignus.com (lakes [10.0.0.3]) by ponds.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA11319; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:57:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from rivers@localhost) by lakes.dignus.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) id NAA16721; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:47:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:47:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas David Rivers Message-Id: <199710031747.NAA16721@lakes.dignus.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org, pechter@lakewood.com Subject: Re: UUCP Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Bill Pechter wrote: > > In article you wrote: > > > Would it be possible to uncomment the HDB capabilities in UUCP for the > > > next release? Even though UUCP died years ago, I'm converting more > > > > UUCP WHAT?? How else are you supposed to do mail backups with > > other ISP, but with UUCP over TCP to your primary line? > > The network I set up in university 2 years ago still works this way, > > and mail goes in and out even if leased line and/or router died. > > > > What about hundreds of customers in xUSSR with non-nailed lines (which > > are more expensive than dedicated ISDN in the U.S.?) etc. > > > > As for UUCP in FreeBSD tree, well, there were some problems reported > > before, but I beleive they were all fixed. > > > > I still think that FreeBSD should adopt the position of supporting HDB > V2 uucp configuration files in the system. (I have to rebuild uucp > after all the make worlds with my own patches to do so...) > > If it's a "lets not do any SysVish stuff" we should be using the 4.3BSD > logging and directory structure with the V2 config files 8-) > > Bill > Back in the "days of yore" - I made exactly the same suggestion. As you noted; after every upgrade I rebuild UUCP to accept my HDB setup... The reasons for using HDB back then were: 1) Reasonably documented in the O'Reilly book. 2) The "uutraf" program understood the HDB log files. 3) I had always done so, since I suffered the pain of converting to HDB.. But, at that time; I was the only person to make the suggestion, so it was decided to leave things alone (the Taylor configs do have some nice options, so there is a good argument to convert.) Since then, there's a new release of the O'Reilly UUCP book that covers Taylor UUCP, there's also a new version of "uutraf" that reads Taylor log files... so reasons #1, and #2 have gone by the wayside. But; being comfortable, I would like to give reason #3 an unduly amount of weight and suggest it again. The config file can by taylored (no pun intended) to accept all three styles; but I would be happy with just HDB and Taylor styles... The problem is the logging style, I believe you can only have one of those. [I prefer the HDB logging style because of reason #3 :-) ] - Dave Rivers -