Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!sri-spam!sri-unix!hplabs!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!ncrcae!sauron!wescott
From: wescott@sauron.UUCP (Mike Wescott)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.uucp
Subject: why does uucico do it this way???
Message-ID: <736@sauron.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Oct-86 16:13:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: sauron.736
Posted: Wed Oct  8 16:13:10 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Oct-86 06:30:50 EDT
Reply-To: wescott@sauron.UUCP (Mike Wescott)
Organization: NCR Corp., Advanced System Development, Columbia, SC
Lines: 39
Keywords: Honey Danber, uucp, uucico, cico.c


Honey Danber uucp has the following code fragment to execute when closing
down the connection:

from cico.c
		.
		.
		.
	(void) alarm(2 * MAXMSGTIME);	/* give slow guys some thrash time */
	omsg('O', "OOOOO", Ofn);
	CDEBUG(4, "send OO %d,", ret);
	if (!setjmp(Sjbuf)) {
		for (;;) {
			omsg('O', "OOOOO", Ofn);
			ret = imsg(msg, Ifn);
			if (ret != 0)
				break;
			if (msg[0] == 'O')
				break;
		}
	}
	(void) alarm(0);
		.
		.
		.

Why do two consecutive omg('O',"OOOOO", Ofn) calls before calling imsg() ?

It has caused problems on a (non-TTY) channel with scarce buffering resources.
I've fixed the behavior of the channel but wonder if there is a reason for
the double omsg(), or whether putting omsg at the bottom of the for(;;) loop
would work as well.  Are there compatibility problems with other verions if
such a change is made?

	Mike Wescott
	ncrcae!wescott