Just received this mail from Riley, it is one amongst several delayed for
up to 12 months or so. I guess that somewhere midway between Alpha
Centauri (?  & sp) and here there is an email reflector by the name of
cuckoo :-)

I include the hjeaders for interest.

Did anybody else get them?

Supplementary Question:

Has anybody produced RPMS (I'm using Mandrake 5.1/2.2.13) for the whole 
AX25 system, particularly related to Baycom USCC cards?


=======================================================================


On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, Riley Williams wrote:

> Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from punt-11.mail.demon.net (punt-11.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.34]) by 
>palaemon.demon.co.uk (8.6.12/v3.2) with SMTP id OAA30296 for 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 12 Feb 2000 14:30:52 GMT
> Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net by mailstore for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>           id 950358832:10:11058:2; Sat, 12 Feb 2000 12:33:52 GMT
> Received: from datela-1-5-81.vol.cz ([212.20.99.3]) by punt-1.mail.demon.net
>            id aa1010931; 12 Feb 2000 12:33 GMT
> Received: (qmail 19180 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2000 12:01:31 -0000
> Received: from cuckoo.karlov.mff.cuni.cz by localhost with POP3
>       (fetchmail-5.0.7) for marian@localhost (single-drop); Sat, 12
>       Feb 2000 13:01:30 +0100 (CET)
> Received: from SpoolDir by CUCKOO (Mercury 1.43); 6 Apr 99 03:26:31
>       +0200
> Received: from hacklet.karlov.mff.cuni.cz (195.113.34.66) by
>       plk.mff.cuni.cz (Mercury 1.43) with ESMTP; 6 Apr 99 03:26:28
>       +0200
> Received: from morlor.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
>       ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [195.113.30.2]) by
>       hacklet.karlov.mff.cuni.cz (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6) with
>       ESMTP id DAA13484 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue,
>       6 Apr 1999 03:26:26 +0200 (METDST)
> Received: from vger.rutgers.edu (vger.rutgers.edu [128.6.190.2]) by
>       morlor.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA30242;
>       Tue, 6 Apr 1999 03:23:06 +0200
> Received: by vger.rutgers.edu via listexpand id <217319-25725>; Mon, 5
>       Apr 1999 20:35:16 -0400
> Received: by vger.rutgers.edu id <283158-25726>; Mon, 5 Apr 1999
>       19:53:22 -0400
> Received: from serenity.mcc.ac.uk ([130.88.200.93]:2292 "EHLO
>       serenity.mcc.ac.uk" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]") by
>       vger.rutgers.edu with ESMTP id <217203-25725>; Mon, 5 Apr 1999
>       19:29:24 -0400
> Received: from ps.cus.umist.ac.uk ([192.84.78.160] ident=rhw) by
>       serenity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 1.92 #3) id
>       10UIzB-00023M-00; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 00:40:57 +0100
> Received: from localhost (rhw@localhost) by ps.cus.umist.ac.uk
>       (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id AAA23935; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 00:40:33
>       +0100
> X-Authentication-Warning: ps.cus.umist.ac.uk: rhw owned process doing
>       -bs
> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 00:40:32 +0100 (GMT)
> From: Riley Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: Geoff Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Richard Reynolds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>         John Daniel Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Off topic - 137Mhz signal generator
> In-Reply-To: 
>       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-Id: 
>       <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-hams-outgoing
> 
> Hi Geoff.
> 
>  >> Here in the UK, mains is 240V nominal, and I'd prefer it to work
>  >> on that, but also have a facility for running from a standard car
>  >> battery.
> 
>  > Just a small point - and WAY off topic, but the nominal mains
>  > voltage in the UK and the rest of the EC is 230V - the EC was
>  > "harmonized" (IIRC) on 1st Jan 1998 with the UK and Eire moving
>  > down to 230v, the rest of the EC up to 230V. However, the
>  > current allowable tolerances (-6 +10%) made the move pretty
>  > meaningless. Even the frequency that used to be 50 +/-0.1Hz has
>  > been widened to +/-0.5Hz.
> 
>  > Such is privatisation.
> 
> Actually, things aren't that simple. As far as UK law is concerned,
> the "Electricity Regulations" still require equipment to be designed
> for a mains voltage specification of "nominally 240 volts, with a
> tolerance range of -6.2% to +9.7%", and that's a direct quote...
> 
> Best wishes from Riley.

Now I've received the mail, I'll reply - which takes precidence, UK or EU 
law?

Geoff
-- 
      Geoff Blake        geoff @ palaemon . co . uk          linux 2.0.36
      Chelmsford         g8gnz @ g8gnz . ampr . org          sparc - i586
      Intel create faster processors - Microsoft create slower processes
        The product of a MicroSoft free zone - without a single reboot

Reply via email to