Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!panda!teddy!jpn
From: jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: UNIX to PC File transfer
Message-ID: <4655@teddy.UUCP>
Date: 7 Mar 88 19:04:17 GMT
References: <1054@ur-tut.UUCP> <168@bdt.UUCP>
Reply-To: jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 34
Keywords: xmodem

>>I suggest using xmodem protocol to move files.  Xmodem has been around
>>for many years ...
>
>This is dead end argument.  Kermit has been around for many years too...

I think you both missed the point.  Kermit is a protocol that 1. works
good for text (7 bit) files, and 2.  works on the most brain-damaged of
mainframe systems (because it uses 7 bit ascii printable characters,
and does not strain an 80 character input queue).  If this fits your needs,
then kermit is clearly the protocol of choice.  However, xmodem is almost
ALWAYS faster (especially with binary files) because it uses an 8 bit
data path (kermit has a rather inefficient 8'th bit quoting scheme),
and because it uses a larger packet size.  Using kermit, it is faster
to download a uuencoded file than it is to download the corresponding
binary!

> Every UNIX machine has kermit.

I don't know where you got this gem (our system has kermit, but only
because we got the source distribution tape from Columbia).  Kermit is no
more widely available for UNIX systems than Xmodem.  Both have public-domain
C code versions that run on unix.

>If you want X-modem, use X-modem.  If I want kermit, I'll use kermit.

Sure.  They both have their points.  Since my primary use is to transfer
binary ARC files, I'll take xmodem and its 2 to one speed benefit over
kermit.  Your milage may vary.

--
John P. Nelson
   decvax!genrad!teddy!jpn
   mit-eddie!genrad!teddy!jpn
   ARPA!talcott.harvard.edu!panda!jpn