Xref: utzoo comp.dcom.modems:1165 comp.misc:1602 comp.protocols.misc:191
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!mimsy!aplcen!osiris!mjr
From: mjr@osiris.UUCP (Marcus J. Ranum)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.misc,comp.protocols.misc
Subject: Re: Inquiry on the program 'blast'
Message-ID: <1489@osiris.UUCP>
Date: 24 Dec 87 18:53:44 GMT
References: <150@piring.cwi.nl> <2396@macom1.UUCP>
Organization: Institute For Felinographical Studies
Lines: 22
Summary: so...

In article <2396@macom1.UUCP>, michael@macom1.UUCP (John Michael Mullins) writes:
> I think the interpretation on the 100% error free is along the line of:
> After the file gets to it's destination, the source and the destination 
> will be exactly the same, 100% of the time.  
> 

:-)	:-)	:-)	:-)	:-)	:-)

	I can think of lots of ways to do this:
1) truncate source.	(both files are same size:0)
2) never complete the transaction. (after file gets there, it would arguably
		be 100% the same) (if someone waited to find out)

	Just what the world needs: another bogus testing criterion ! It's like
all the PC dealers who sell "OS/2 compatible" systems....  what's it MEAN !?

--mjr();
-- 
Once, there was NO fun... 
This was before MENU planning, FASHION statements or NAUTILUS equipment...
Then, in 1985..  FUN was completely encoded in this tiny MICROCHIP...  
It contains 14,768 vaguely amusing SIT-COM pilots!!