PE>>> Have you done any testing of Tobruk?  Like I say, I don't want Squish

 PE>>> abending on me and be powerless to do anything about it, but I'd

 PE>>> rather not be the first to find out if there's any
problems.  As soon

 PE>>> as it's generating 4D addresses, I should be able to use it.



 PM>> No, I haven't tried it for a while. I was going to wait for the next

 PM>> release before doing any more.



 PE> What is missing from 0.08 that you need?  I sent you the current 0.09

 PE> which has a fix in it, but shouldn't affect you seeing as you only want

 PE> it to toss to your messagebase.  I sent it to you mainly because I'm

 PE> working on it today to handle multiple packets (yay!) and wanted a backup

 PE> of it.  The multiple packets both works as far as processing multiple

 PE> packets is concerned, but doesn't work as far as a "close
error" and a

 PE> trap 5 are concerned!  BFN.



It's not a matter of needing anything. As I've already told you, at this
stage in its development I'm not prepared to run it against my real message
base. Close errors and traps are exactly the sort of reasons why not.



I noticed that I'd received another version. Does this mean I've become you
official disaster recovery site :-)



Paul



--- GoldED/2 2.42.G1114