🚀 go-pugleaf

John Washington (john@wash.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> On Monday, in article <842283433snz@bobsh.demon.co.uk>
>      Bob@bobsh.demon.co.uk "Robert. S. Harris." wrote:
> 
> RH> Sorry about this fellahs,  The welcome text said it was KA9Q 2.16D
> RH> with http
> RH> but it said "unknown command" when I tried to use the http.
> 
> Sorry Bob.  Egg on my face time.
> 
> Corrected smallnet already uploaded.  No doubt it will be
> replaced when Malcolm processes the next batch of uploads
> (currently twice a week, he said).

The corrected upload was released on Tuesday evening as I recall.
I have not yet made the announcement to demon.archives.announce
however.

> RH> Note:  The supported NET.EXE was 414,730 SMALLNET.EXE was 402,782.
> RH>            SMALLNET.EXE smaller?
> 
> Hmmm.  Even the corrected (I hope) one is only 406K.  I have
> no explanation.  Anybody?

Smallnet (the supported one) is smaller than net.exe as some
functionallity is removed so it can run in less memory (the BBS is
not available for example). If John's version is build from the
supported smallnet, adding http could still result in less memory
use than the supported full version of net.exe

-- 
Malcolm S. Muir                                Demon Internet Ltd.
Sunderland                                     322 Regents Park Road
England                                        London N3 2QQ