BL> A small catch was that it sent my own replies too...

 PE> What do you mean "your own replies"? Are you talking about
 PE> messages that were posted here and that Jeff gated into the
 PE> UUCP side? If so, then that is what I would expect. If you
 PE> don't want dupes, you simply stop calling BOTH fido + UUCP,
 PE> choose UUCP only.

  As you were the hub, I expected you to suppress my own mail coming
back to me, the same as Fido. Not that it matters... I actually *add*
my own mail at this end.

  The *real* problem is that all your mail is missing a To: field. 
Everything is to "all". 

 BL> Or to put it another way... why the FUCK don't you use .z!

 PE> Um. I would have expected it to be the same as that rosebay
 PE> stuff, isn't it? 

  I've since learned a little more. The drosebay.z file is WRONG!

  At my end on the download from you, I get two files per message:
0023.D (the compressed DATa for a news group) and 0023.X (the
envelope). These are put in a spool\scorpio\ directory at my end,
automatically. If I called Jeff, it would crrate a spool\grntrs
directory for his stuff. What I have to do is rename the .D file .Z
(or add a Z on the end) before I uncompress it.

  Apparently, FXUUCICO and TaylorUUCP can handle an Execution command
that you send to eliminate the .X file. This file starts life in Unix
format as X.ff0023 and is "munged" into DOS format at my end to ff0023.X.

  At *my* end when I upload, I send the stuff that is in your
UUCPXMPL.zip file... a 0023.DAT (the message) a 0023.XQT (the
envelope) and a 0023.CMD (theUUCICO command file). If it's netmail (a
single message) I send it uncompressed. If it's news I send it
compressed with a "#! cunbatch" line on the front to let you know 
it's a batch file (several messages, compressed).

  I still don't know the format of the files...

 BL> How do I identify actual mail? The mad "#! cunbatch" line is
 BL> not on all mail... 

 PE> I think it should be, on all news.

  I'm not sure if it's on news, or compressed mail, or both.

 BL> Can I rely on the .d extension? Can I rely on the #! cunbatch
 BL> line?

 PE> Dunno + dunno.

  I can rely on the .D extension. This is standard. I have not found
any mention of the cunbatch line yet. I'll dowload your RFC index and
see if I can find a mention of it there.

 PE> I would expect everything from now on to be consistent, because
 PE> I am ONLY sending newsgroups at the moment, there is no email
 PE> capability (not that I've set up, anyway!). 

  email is never compressed, according the the Watergate doc. It's
quite a good tutorial, btw.

 BL> How would you like my replies sent?

 PE> Um. Whatever's "standard".

  ROFL! Guess my next question... what's the standard? And don't say
UUCP or RFC-822... in English, what's the standard?

 BL> Would you mind if I changed the first line to "#! cunthook"?

 PE> Yes. Doesn't your software do all this stuff automatically?

  ROFL!!! What software? I'm writing it!

 BL> The mail transfer seems to work okay but it's bloody slow with
 BL> so many separate small files each from a different person.
 BL> Doesn't UUCP have a packet standard so you can send them all at
 BL> once?

 PE> Yes, that's what the #!rnews header should be on the files you
 PE> decompress. Check the stuff that Jeff sent, that was all
 PE> processed in one hit so you should have heaps of data in one
 PE> file.

  Yes... Jeff's stuff was a nice big file. All the other ones were
singles. I meant... doesn't your software bundle it for each download?

 PE> I believe a new file is created for every time I run
 PE> "send-uucp". In the testing stages I do that a fair bit! 

  Ahh... 

 BL> I've started writing my mail processor... what language would
 BL> annoy you more, VB or Pascal?

 PE> I suppose I should say "Pascal", in the hope that that will
 PE> make you write some ISO Pascal code, that at least has a ghost
 PE> of a chance of being compiled on Linux. 

  In that case I'll write it for Windows. In fact, I am going to do
that, using Delphi (probably). I've decided to give Fido and QWK the
flick... I'll be sorry to lose BlueWave, though: an almost perfect 
program.

 BL> THESE SMARTARSE UNIX-WANKERS GIVE ME THE SHITS!!!!!!

 PE> Boy oh boy this stuff has been complex to set up.

  I keep screaming and kicking the dog. I'm still trying to work out
WTF RFC822 is...

 BL> First, they put a #1 cunthook header their compress doesn't
 BL> handle,

 PE> Doesn't fxuucico do that by any chance?

  No...

  I've got a version of compress a wanker wrote to handle that line,
and it works fine in uncompress but it doesn't put the line on in
compress, in spite of him thinking it does! Whatta wanker!

 BL> they have no way to tell if the file is compressed *inside* the
 BL> file (PKZIP uses "PK" as the first two characters), and then
 BL> they use

 PE> Are you sure there's no identifier, e.g. 0x01 or something?

  I keep telling myself there *must* be something, but I can't find
it. I suppose they'd put it at the end, using the same loony logic as
putting cunthook at the front! ROFL!! Oh, jeezus these guys are twits!

 PE> Actually, it sends long filenames doesn't it? You know, I might
 PE> be sending you .z's, and fxcico might be translating them. 

  It does! It munges unix-wanks into DOS names.

 PE> Did you ever stop to think that it might be ALL YOUR FAULT and
 PE> my system is PERFECTLY SET UP?

  Actually, you are right. It's the drosebay.z that's wrong.

Regards,
Bob

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
@EOT:

---