29 Jul 16 22:17, you wrote to me:

 JL>>> HPT for DOS.

 ml>> ok... it looks like it needs some
""adjustment"" to ensure it writes
 ml>> both, the file name on the disk and the one in the ?LO file,

 KR> Why hpt/DOS? If hpt/lnx runs later it could mess up the case too.

i don't see any usecase where there would be two hpts running on the same
message bases from two different OSes... my understanding is that he is only
using hpt/dos and that there is no hpt/linux involved... i'm looking at trying
the entire process with hpt/linux and leaving hpt/dos unused in the
bitbucket...

 ml>> message bases accessible from the *nix side and run hpt/linux instead
 ml>> of hpt/dos for your mail processing...

 KR> Hm, mail processing is a two step thing. My first step would be to
 KR> disable packing and take a look at the *.pkt. If packing is a problem
 KR> of the DOS packer, then packing with hpt/lnx would fix it.

if that works, it would appear to simply point to the packing area of hpt/dos
as being the place where the above mentioned
""adjustment"" need be applied...

i do, however, fully agree with you that archiving (what you call
"packing")
the PKTs into bundles is an unnecessary task\step in this day in time... my
systems and those i have admin access to have not created any FTN mail bundles
(eg: mo2, we1) in a very long time... there is just no need for them any more
and the transfer protocol can compress them on the fly for transmission if
needed (eg: binkd gzip support)...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey

... Humble pie tastes better a la mode.
---