🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <419@uwmacc.UUCP> anderson@uwmacc.UUCP (Jess Anderson) writes:
>Did anybody else pick up SPL from Dennis Baer (...!helm!dlbaer)?
>I did, and I'm having a problem I don't understand. I hope someone
>can help me with it. Baer distributed his program (binary) in
>five parts, posted to this newsgroup. I was interested, so I saved
>the parts, stripped the extra lines off the heads and tails of the
>parts, cat-ed them into one large file, fed that file to uudecode
>to obtain spllib.arc, transferred the .arc file 
>First try, I get one
>program partially un-arced (BLACKJAC.SP), then the error message
>ABORT: stack overflow. 
>   I was pretty careful about handling the 5-part postings and
>assembling then into one file to feed to uudecode.

You have to be careful when stripping the heads and tails.  I noticed that
there were three blank lines at the end of each file.  I removed them and
did not cat the files.  I instead use and editor which allows me to make
sure that there are no blank lines when I reassemble the file.  I put all
five parts together that way.  I ran through uudecode and used kermit in
the binary mode to put files on the pc.  I unarced them using arc.512
and had no problems.  I would recheck the initial building of the main file.

In article <1154@tekigm2.UUCP> jimb@tekigm2.UUCP writes:
>In article <419@uwmacc.UUCP> anderson@uwmacc.UUCP (Jess Anderson) writes:
>>Did anybody else pick up SPL from Dennis Baer (...!helm!dlbaer)?
>>[...] I was pretty careful about handling the 5-part postings and
>>assembling then into one file to feed to uudecode.
>
>You have to be careful when stripping the heads and tails.  I noticed that
>there were three blank lines at the end of each file.  I removed them and
>[...] had no problems.  I would recheck the initial building of the main file.

I also downloaded SPL and observed the above-mentioned blank lines. However,
I downloaded the UUencoded program and decoded it on my PC before unARCing
it. I used a word processor to strip all the lines (blanks included) and 
the DOS COPY command to "cat" the files. Encountered no problems with ARC.
I tried running a couple of the sample programs and all seems well. I have
had better luck downloading the UUencoded files than the binary ARC files.
Someone posted Turbo Pascal versions of UUdecode and UUencode a while back 
on net.sources if you don't have them.
                                             Jim Greenlee
-- 
The Shadow
Georgia Insitute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!jkg

In article <419@uwmacc.UUCP>, anderson@uwmacc.UUCP (Jess Anderson) writes:
> Did anybody else pick up SPL from Dennis Baer (...!helm!dlbaer)?
> I did, and I'm having a problem I don't understand. I hope someone
> can help me with it. Baer distributed his program (binary) in
> five parts, posted to this newsgroup. I was interested, so I saved
> the parts, stripped the extra lines off the heads and tails of the
> parts, cat-ed them into one large file, fed that file to uudecode
> to obtain spllib.arc, transferred the .arc file (kermit on the
> Unix Vax-11/780 (BSD 4.3), ProComm 2.4.2 Kermit on my PC-clone
> Z-158), and (on the PC) ran ARC51 on it. First try, I get one
> program partially un-arced (BLACKJAC.SP), then the error message
> ABORT: stack overflow. Hm, I think, try ARC's t option, which then
> yields: Archive truncated in file BLACKJAC.SP, One error detected.
>    Damn! Supposing I may have gotten an error during the Kermit
> step, I transfer the file again to a new disk [ugh, 31 minutes
> @ 2400 baud!]. Same result.
>    I was pretty careful about handling the 5-part postings and
> assembling then into one file to feed to uudecode.
>    Nevertheless, something could have happened at that step.
> However, if someone else got the same result I did, maybe the
> fault is in what was posted. 
>    If someone knows what I should do next (or even has suggestions),
> I'd appreciate some e-mail on that. ADVthanksANCE...
> -- 
> ==ARPA:====================anderson@unix.macc.wisc.edu===Jess Anderson======
> |      (Please use ARPA if you can.)                     MACC              |
> | UUCP: {harvard,seismo,topaz,                           1210 W. Dayton    | 
> |    akgua,allegra,ihnp4,usbvax}!uwvax!uwmacc!anderson   Madison, WI 53706 |
> | BITNET:                            anderson@wiscmacc   608/263-6988      |
> ==Words are not just blown air. They have a meaning.=====(Chuang Tsu)=======
	O.K. I had to try this sol too,,, my copy which i downloaded 
twice showed manual,picture,and some other file as having bad sector 
info,,,,But The WORST part was I had to get a binary file from the 
WRONG!!!!! place, why can't people put thier files (binary) in net-       
.sources or in whatever category they belong in....I can only assume
from the posting and the defensiveness on the part of the poster that
he was an amateur and lacked proper netiquette....Well I suppose I
have flamed him enough for his lack of whatever he is missing....
	And by the way the file reached more than one sit screwed
up I downloaded from two separate sites and got the exact byte-
counts and messages each time.....Amateurs!!!

	In hopes this will tee off the 
		proper people --- Netiquette!
			
			Thanks for your time..

> [...],,,,But The WORST part was I had to get a binary file from the 
> WRONG!!!!! place, why can't people put thier files (binary) in net-       
> .sources or in whatever category they belong in....I can only assume
> from the posting and the defensiveness on the part of the poster that
> he was an amateur and lacked proper netiquette....Well I suppose I
> have flamed him enough for his lack of whatever he is missing....
> 	And by the way the file reached more than one sit screwed
> up I downloaded from two separate sites and got the exact byte-
> counts and messages each time.....Amateurs!!!
> 
Well, the problems I had were none of Dennis Baer's doing, because
I had correctly saved and concatenated his 5-part post. Uudecoding
it went without a hitch. Once I got my both Kermits working together
in proper fashion (our Unix Kermit is badly braindamaged), I got the
SPLLIB.ARC over to my micro and unarced without any problems. So the
posting was complete and correct.

On the point of *where* it was posted, unless I'm mistaken there is
in fact *no* correct place to post binaries on the net, and the
backbones have lately been complaining quite loudly about such
posting being improper here. To be fair to Baer [:-)], those
complaints came *after* his posting. I believe net.sources is
quite specifically *not* for binaries, hence the name "sources."

File SPLLIB.ARC is freely available from the Bulletin Board of
the Nicolet Instrument Corp., 1200/2400 baud, 608/273-5037, Mike
Brown, SysOp, nights and weekends.

Personally, the breach of etiquette offends me more than the
breach of netiquette--consider the root meaning of the word
"amateur," for example. A little generosity of spirit for those
more *and* less skilled than ourselves, maybe ... :-) :-) :-) ??
-- 
==ARPA:====================anderson@unix.macc.wisc.edu===Jess Anderson======
|      (Please use ARPA if you can.)                     MACC              |
| UUCP: {harvard,seismo,topaz,                           1210 W. Dayton    | 
|    akgua,allegra,ihnp4,usbvax}!uwvax!uwmacc!anderson   Madison, WI 53706 |
| BITNET:                            anderson@wiscmacc   608/263-6988      |
==Words are not just blown air. They have a meaning.=====(Chuang Tsu)=======

In article <845@gould9.UUCP> rob@gould9.UUCP (rob) writes:
>In article <419@uwmacc.UUCP>, anderson@uwmacc.UUCP (Jess Anderson) writes:
>> Did anybody else pick up SPL from Dennis Baer (...!helm!dlbaer)?
>> I did, and I'm having a problem I don't understand. I hope someone

>	O.K. I had to try this sol too,,, my copy which i downloaded 
>twice showed manual,picture,and some other file as having bad sector 
>info,,,,But The WORST part was I had to get a binary file from the 
>WRONG!!!!! place, why can't people put thier files (binary) in net-       
>.sources or in whatever category they belong in....I can only assume
>from the posting and the defensiveness on the part of the poster that
>he was an amateur and lacked proper netiquette....Well I suppose I
>have flamed him enough for his lack of whatever he is missing....
>	And by the way the file reached more than one sit screwed
>up I downloaded from two separate sites and got the exact byte-
>counts and messages each time.....Amateurs!!!
>
>	In hopes this will tee off the 
>		proper people --- Netiquette!
>			
>			Thanks for your time..

Maybe I am missing something here, but why in hell are you trying to flame
the guy who posted the program ? If a program does not reach your site or
if it reaches there all mangled up, it is **not** the fault of the poster.
I had absolutely NO PROBLEM with cat'ing the 5 parts and downloading to my
PC. It works like a charm. I know for a fact that a lot of people have
problems in getting programs off the net to work, simply because they don't
do it right. Some don't strip off ALL the header and footer lines, some
don't use a binary protocol when downloading and some don't read instructions
of ARC or maybe just have a bad ARC program.

As for posting binaries to the net. There is no **right** newgroup for posting
binaries, because there is no net.pc.binaries or mod.pc.binaries. Please
DO NOT post binaries to net.sources which is exclusively for sources. Till 
a pc.bianries newgroup is created, we will have to live with binary postings
to net.micro.pc.



-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Atul Kacker
UUCP    : {allegra|seismo|decvax}!rochester!ur-tut!akk2
BITNET  : AKK2@UORDBV

In article <845@gould9.UUCP> rob@gould9.UUCP (rob) writes:
[After a discussion regarding problems downloading SPL]
>	O.K. I had to try this sol too,,, my copy which i downloaded 
>twice showed manual,picture,and some other file as having bad sector 
>info,,,,But The WORST part was I had to get a binary file from the 
>WRONG!!!!! place, why can't people put thier files (binary) in net-       
>.sources or in whatever category they belong in....I can only assume

HOW can you call net.micro.pc the "WRONG!!!!!" place without offering
a reasonable alternative?  There is no net.binaries.pc, or other truly
suitable group.  net.sources is a much more global group than is net.micro.pc.

>from the posting and the defensiveness on the part of the poster that
>he was an amateur and lacked proper netiquette....Well I suppose I
>have flamed him enough for his lack of whatever he is missing....

Whatever HE is missing?  Perhaps a bit of self-examination is in order.

>	And by the way the file reached more than one sit screwed
>up I downloaded from two separate sites and got the exact byte-
>counts and messages each time.....Amateurs!!!

It also reached a number of sites in perfectly clean condition.  There
are no errors in the .arc file I ended up with.  Well rob, are you
volunteering to moderate mod.sources.pc & mod.binaries.pc?  Without
these, there's no way way to clean up net.micro.pc.

>
>	In hopes this will tee off the 
>		proper people --- Netiquette!

Whatever that means...

Why are there so many people out there that love to jump on someone
else for what they feel is an inappropriate submission?  Why do so
few of these people have constructive suggestions?  The original
submission was, without doubt, much more appropriate than the response
it elicited.

John Allen
=========================================================================
NetExpress Communications, Inc.      seismo!{sundc|hadron}!netxcom!jallen
1953 Gallows Road, Suite 300         (703) 749-2238
Vienna, Va., 22180
=========================================================================