Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!scgvaxd!stb!michael
From: michael@stb.UUCP (Michael)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Patching uucico to WINDOWS 7 on Microport 2.2
Message-ID: <1614@stb.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Jun-87 15:19:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: stb.1614
Posted: Sun Jun 28 15:19:59 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Jun-87 06:28:16 EDT
References: <122@ddsw1.UUCP>
Reply-To: michael@stb.UUCP (Michael)
Organization: STB BBS, La, Ca, USA, 90402
Lines: 14
Keywords: Microport uucico patch
Xref: mnetor news.admin:566 comp.unix.wizards:3024

In article <122@ddsw1.UUCP> karl@ddsw1.UUCP (Karl Denninger) writes:
>Question: Why use DOS at all, and not 'patch'? Well, although patch documents
>that it can use a hard address, we've been unable to get it to accept this
>form of the command. Since uucico (and everything else) is stripped, you
>cannot use a symbolic address.... thus the need for this route.

Better question: Why not use ADB? It can, quite nicely, patch executables
(striped or unstripped), text files, inodes, superblocks, etc.

Ok, so not nicely, but still... I had to patch my uucico that way.

-- 
: Michael Gersten		seismo!scgvaxd!stb!michael
: Monsters from outta space -- 3-11-2