Subject: Re: UUCP removal from OpenBSD
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/01/2001 11:20:40
[ On Sunday, September 30, 2001 at 23:10:14 (-0400), Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: UUCP removal from OpenBSD
> There's another perfectly good version of "cu" available to us in the BSD
> sources; we still ship "tip" from there. Not to mention that using cu vs.
> tip is largely a matter of personal preference; they both do the same job.
Well, IMNSHO (and having very intensively used many different serial
communications programs under many different unix implementation for
over 15 years now), I find 'tip' is no match for 'cu' -- tip tries to do
too much, and gets too much wrong way too often. Any time anything gets
out of whack it seems infinitely harder to debug the problems with 'tip'.
For me 'cu' "Just Works(tm)"
The other thing of course is that 'tip' has an archaic and baroque
configuration scheme, whereas 'cu' is well integrated with UUCP's
configuration files, making their combined and co-operative usage quite
> If we want to include a tiny serial thing in the base distribution, I'd say
> the miniature version of kermit ("gkermit") that's freely licensed (compared
> to the rather restrictive C-Kermit license) would be a much better choice.
That might be OK.... anything might be better than 'tip'! ;-)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>