Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!ephram
From: ephram@violet.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: too much work
Message-ID: <9449@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 30 Apr 88 20:09:30 GMT
References: <39@bbking.KSP.Unisys.COM> <7686@ncoast.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: ephram@violet.berkeley.edu.UUCP ()
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 46

In article <7686@ncoast.UUCP> smith@ncoast.UUCP (Phil Smith) writes:
>> Article <39@bbking.KSP.Unisys.COM> From: rmarks@KSP.Unisys.COM (richard marks)
>
>> I agree.  It is just too much work to edit each file with vi to cut
>> then run it as a shell script then uudecode.  Lets just keep it simple.
>> 
>If you use the shell script that was provided it is much less work.
I did not see a shell script to trim the headers and then sh each file.  If
such a beast exists it should be included in part one of each posting that
gets split up.  I am no expert and I could probably (2-3 hours) get a script
to do this working I have not the inclination to do so.  Please send me one
At current I feel that the "new" method is clumsier than the old one.

The old method I used was 
1) from rn get a list of subject lines
2) save all of the files with one command in the propper order to a file
3)vi the beast and do a search for /From or the persons .sig and do some delete
   lines (almost always the same # of lines or off by 1).
4) uudecode the beast.

the new method I am ofrced to use is
1) from rn get a list of subject lines
2..n+1) issue a seperate command for each file to save it to an ascii coalated
     set of file names (oops 10 comes before 2) (I know now use 02)
n+2..2n+1) issue vi for each file and delete 1st N lines (see note to 3 above)
               then delete .sig (some postings do not have and exit or some
               such
2n+2..3n+1) run sh on each of the files.

The thing that bugs me is that I now have to do 16 routine boring somewhat
time comsuming steps to get at what before took only 4 routine boring
somewhat time consuming steps.  I also feel that the 4 step method that I
used before was/is faster (opinion mine) than the current method that I
am _forced_ to use (I am no unix expert and do not really wish to be one
I just want some neat DOS software).
.
>The script removes the headers, runs sh on the files, cats them together,
>and runs uudecode on it. Appears to the best solution I have seen when
>a file HAS to be split in to several parts for transmission.
>-- 
I agree that something like this would be beneficial I would substitute
my step 2,3 & 4 for step 2..n+1, n+2 (run some unpacker that trimmed...).
The vi step is what I found most uncomfortable and the one I have to do
N more times with the new method.

Ephram Cohen
ephram@violet.berkeley.edu