Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!ora!minya!jc
From: jc@minya.UUCP (John Chambers)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: Re: how can you keep on moving, unless you migrate too?
Message-ID: <419@minya.UUCP>
Date: 6 Jul 90 02:54:51 GMT
References: <EMV.90Jun17235837@stag.math.lsa.umich.edu> <PCG.90Jun25084059@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Lines: 28

> 			 Anonymous FTAM is far less convenient
> (it's currently strictly offline, spooled, batch) than FTP, but at
> least the user is is the much more convenient "guest" rather than
> "anonymous" :-).

Eh?  These are exactly the reasons that I prefer using uucp to ftp,
when both are available.  The problem with ftp (and rcp) is that the
terminal (or window) is tied up for the duration, and I have to sit
there and hold its hand to get it to work right.  With uucp, I can
submit the job (with a -m option if I want notification when it'd done)
and go about other work.  Across a LAN, ftp and uucp run at about the
same speed (though uucp is usually somewhat faster), so there's no
reason there to choose between them.  Convenience is all on the side
of uucp.  I don't even have to tell it to do a binary copy; forgetting
this is the thing that makes most ftp copies take twice as long as 
they should.

Of course, there is the minor inconvenience that uucp creates files
at the destination that are owned by uucp, but I solved that one years
ago.  I have a little script "mine file ..." that changes the files'
ownership to mine.  (It's a trivial script for a Real Unix Hacker; 
so much for filesystem security. ;-)

-- 
Typos and silly ideas Copyright (C) 1990 by:
Uucp: ...!{harvard.edu,ima.com,eddie.mit.edu,ora.com}!minya!jc (John Chambers)
Home: 1-617-484-6393
Work: 1-508-952-3274