Subject: Re: Adding gkermit
To: Thor Lancelot Simon <email@example.com>
From: Manuel Bouyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/31/2006 19:46:42
On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 03:57:41PM -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 09:14:11PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > I think if we go this route we should import lrzsz instead of gkermit.
> > Most embeded device talk the x, y or z modem protocol and I think if we
> > add something to transfers files over serial (which I support), it should
> > also be usefull for non-netbsd (or non-unix) boxes. FWIW, hyperterminal will
> > do at last x-modem too.
> Actually, Kermit may be the most widely ported (to different operating
> systems) communications software out there. Between C-Kermit, MS-Kermit,
> Kermit-95,and G-Kermit, it's hard to find anything you can't run some
> implementation of the Kermit protocol on.
> I agree that x/y/zmodem are more commonly used for this purpose, and I don't
> care very much, but in my experience kermit as a protocol is more robust
> in difficult conditions, and I think that the idea that it is not as widely
> available is something of a misperception.
My point was to use the in-tree tool to also talk with embeded devices.
All manageable ethernet switches I've used talk xmodem for example, but not
Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference