On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 01:24:23AM -0800, Patrick R. Wade wrote:
>In this it's like UUCP - antiquated, but lacking a good successor. [0]
I prefer to consider it "stable", not antiquated. When I'm driving around
the country in my van, getting e-mail over a 1KB/sec lossy link, I have UUCP
to thank for it not being as painful as it sounds...
>[0] The UUCP function that is sorely missing is the ability to push
>an arbitrary file to an arbitrary remote user. In practice people try
That's not UUCP's job. Using the same logic, one could say that TCP/IP is
antiquated because it doesn't provide that functionality. UUCP, like
TCP/IP, is a transport. You can add a "rfiledist" program into UUCP that
would do this sort of thing, and UUCP would happily handle it. You can run
any remote process via UUCP, as long as the permissions are set up. So
what's stopping you from achieving this goal?
>Keeping UUCP running is starting to seem a lot like keeping a 130-year-old
>man who smokes 4 packs a day on life support because he's the last person
Wow... Everyone here at tummy.com is using UUCP as the last hop to their
personal machine for e-mail. Other than adding/removing users, I don't
think I've *EVER* had to muck with UUCP. It just works.
Sean
--
Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life.
-- Eric Hoffer
Sean Reifschneider, Inimitably Superfluous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tummy.com - Linux Consulting since 1995. Qmail, KRUD, Firewalls, Python
