Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!topaz!husc6!seismo!mcvax!ukc!warwick!kay
From: kay@warwick.UUCP (Kay Dekker)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.adm
Subject: Another mangled article line...
Message-ID: <305@ubu.warwick.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 6-Jul-86 17:45:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: ubu.305
Posted: Sun Jul  6 17:45:51 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jul-86 05:03:56 EDT
References: <407@midas.UUCP>
Reply-To: kay@warwick.UUCP (Kay Dekker)
Organization: Computer Science, Warwick University, UK
Lines: 33
Xref: watmath net.news:5081 net.news.adm:838
Summary: The compress bug again?

Here's the Path line from the header:

Path: warwick!ukc!mcvax!seismo!harvard!think!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!hplabs!tektronix!teklds!midas!jeffw

And the offending section:

>Oh, and take a look at the chord progression. Nothing in particular at first,
>just remember it. Now look down to where at seees tg be `eadafg tgwardC eafgr  assueafg qgur cgpq as af F eafgr!$ bust past w`ere t`ere's a D6'5&Wgw! _hi|(haxxmnml? It's as if the singer suddenly realized that magic was
>mentioned - and the key drifts off in a totally different and wonderfully
>rich direction. (Note to academics - cleverly done by reinterpreting the D
>as a leading tone, nicht wahr?) If the song is a gem, this must be one of
>the sparkles. Point 2: The unexpected happens naturally, gorgeously, before
>you even know what's going on.

This is the third article about this kind of mangle I've posted this year;
OK, I may be NewsAdmin here, but I don't get to proofread *every* article
that flows through warwick; how many articles are getting partially trashed
in this way? - it's less obvious than the line-eater bug (of ill fame) cos
the dross may not appear until quite a way through an article...

If this *is* a compress bug (as someone who sounded knowledgeable guessed -
I can't remember who...), then any sites that use compress for batching news
may be vulnerable: maybe sites along the afflicted Path should state their
version number & any local hacks.  We might be able to kill this one off
quickly.  FYI, warwick is running 3.0, no hacks.  Are there any later
versions?

Alternatively, it could be a bit (or bits) trashed during transfer of a
bach that compressed OK; but surely all transmission protocols specify some
sort of checksum/error recovery method? no?

						Distressed,
							Kay.