Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!super.upenn.edu!eecae!nancy!umix!uunet!pyrdc!gmu90x!dolqci!vrdxhq!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!w8sdz From: w8sdz@brl-smoke.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: LIM EMS 4.0 -- THE WHOLE THING! Message-ID: <6637@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Sun, 1-Nov-87 13:27:00 EST Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6637 Posted: Sun Nov 1 13:27:00 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 3-Nov-87 04:08:22 EST References: <814@plx.UUCP> <8066@ritcsh.UUCP> <2218@mcdchg.UUCP> Reply-To: w8sdz@brl.arpa (Keith B. Petersen (WSMR|towson) ) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 20 I appreciated the fact that the LIM EMS 4.0 spec was posted in ARC form. When I extracted the document and got no error messages from ARC I know I had an *exact* copy of what was posted. When Usenet fixes whatever mungs some plain-text postings I will be sympathetic to the argument that it took more resorces to send the uuencoded ARC. Did you know that the "compress" program has NO error checking? Try deliberately truncating a compressed file and then uncompress it. There is no warning that it's munged! It is my opinion that this is the major cause for inaccurate text transfers on Usenet. ARC includes a CRC for each member file. The CP/M program CRUNCH, a decendant of compress, also includes a CRC *and* the name of the original file. The authors of crunch would do well to look at CRUNCH to see how it should be done! -- Keith Petersen Arpa: W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARPA Uucp: {bellcore,decwrl,harvard,lll-crg,ucbvax,uw-beaver}!simtel20.arpa!w8sdz GEnie: W8SDZ