Article View: comp.sys.mac
Article #22849Re: Conjecture: why several tech notes failed
From: Roger L. Long
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1987 20:18
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1987 20:18
21 lines
1331 bytes
1331 bytes
In article <9827@ut-sally.UUCP> brian@ut-sally.UUCP (Brian H. Powell) writes:
>Do I need to point out the importance of checking your postings _before_ you
>post them? Perhaps this was done; after all we do have a moderator.
All the postings of Tech Notes went out intact. Were they were munged is
anyone's guess.
> It looks to me like the three tech notes that failed with CRC all had the
>longest filenames. Perhaps binhex 4 never thought it would encounter a
>filename longer than 28 bytes (or so; I haven't actually done any tests.) Can
>anybody corroborate?
Well, BinHex 4 is the one who produced the Hqx files, so I would assume that
it should be able to deHqx them. Most likely, the problem is that one or more
sites down the line decided to drop characters and corrupted the posting.
*sigh*
--
Roger L. Long
FileNet Corp
{hplabs,trwrb}!felix!bytebug
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<15811@felix.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccicpg!felix!bytebugReferences:
<9827@ut-sally.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccicpg!felix!bytebug From: bytebug@felix.UUCP (Roger L. Long) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Conjecture: why several tech notes failed Message-ID: <15811@felix.UUCP> Date: 11 Dec 87 20:18:12 GMT References: <9827@ut-sally.UUCP> Sender: daemon@felix.UUCP Reply-To: bytebug@felix.UUCP (Roger L. Long) Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA Lines: 21