Path: utzoo!utstat!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!umigw!mthvax!wb8foz
From: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Bogus .UUCP addresses under SCO (TRN TRN TRN !!!)
Message-ID: <1990Oct5.001652.17931@mthvax.cs.miami.edu>
Date: 5 Oct 90 00:16:52 GMT
References: <1990Oct1.011018.10124@mthvax.cs.miami.edu> <373@stephsf.stephsf.com>
Reply-To: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher)
Distribution: na
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews Abusers
Lines: 34

In response to my query for a down-under site, Bill England writes:

>> Why would SCO ship brain_damaged binaries such as this?
>   The .uucp suffix is a Configuration feature of rn.  It is HARD 
>   wired and there is nothing you can do about it accept recompile
>   rn.  SCO is not likely to redesign the 'free' software.

>   The Reply-To: line is now obsolete anyway!  Look at the header
>   and see how redundant a Reply-To: line would be.  
>>
And goes on to recommend cnews and trn.


As I pointed out, SCO had not given him source. I would not accept such
either, hence my query (still unresolved) as to why SCO was not
including the source.

I strongly disagree as to the value of a Reply-to: header. NOT ALL
SITES accept mail at the posting location. Some *try* to, and often
fail. For example, there's that little outfit that used to install TWX
machines, what WAS their name? Oh yes: ATT.... ;_]

And, you can add a Reply-to: to the environment, post-compilation, no
small advantage if you have ONLY binaries.

I had already pitched 'nn' to the oz chap before asking on the net. We
don't keep {t,r}rn around here any more since nn is used virtually
exclusively.

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.....wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu 
& no one will talk to a host that's close............(305) 255-RTFM
Unless the host (that isn't close)......................pob 570-335
is busy, hung or dead....................................33257-0335