Mail Archives: cygwin/2000/10/09/10:16:36
Kermit isn't even a file transfer protocol any more. It's more
like a shell. You can move remote files, delete remote files,
etc. It's like FTP, only slower. ;)
c
At 02:57 PM 10/8/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>What ever happened to Zmodem? Didn't gsz provide a gnu port?
>
>Shell
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jeff" <darkmoon AT cinenet DOT net>
>Newsgroups: lists.cygwin
>To: <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
>Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 1:17 PM
>Subject: Re: Building C-Kermit (6.0.192) with Cygwin 1.1
>
>
>> As seen from lists.cygwin, on
>> Sun, 8 Oct 2000 10:02:40 +0100,
>> David Starks-Browning <starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk> wrote:
>>
>> >Kermit ... now there's a blast from the past!
>>
>> Not from *my* past! :) The current enhanced kermit protocol, when
>> tuned for speed, is as fast as your serial connection, and is robust
>> enough to get files though bad connections when other modem protocols
>> give up and die. Kermit software is well written, thoroughly tested,
>> and totally supported by the developers. As long as it stays that way,
>> I'll keep using it. :)
>>
>> >On Saturday 7 Oct 00, Jeff writes:
>> >> So, I'm back to my original question: Which of the makefile targets
>> >> work best? When presented with a package that has very system-specific
>> >> targets, which is best? Which flavor of Unix does Cygwin most
>> >> resemble? Linux? FreeBSD? Or maybe a more general target, if
>> >> available, such as BSD or System5R4? Or-? C-Kermit has never failed
>> >> to build and run "straight out of the box" when it was obvious which
>> >> makefile target to use.
>> >
>> >Jeff, I think your best bet is to get the Kermit folks to figure this
>> >out.
>>
>> A very good suggestion-- I have already posted in
>> comp.protocols.kermit.misc, where I am hoping the developers may
>> respond sometime this week.
>>
>> > Aside from that, you'll just have to experiment and deal with
>> >the differences yourself.
>>
>> I've tried some experimentation but, with my limited knowledge, this
>package
>> is far too complex for me to be able to figure out what to do. As
>> usual, I first searched the net before posting. I tried deja.com, the
>> archives for this list, the Cygwin website, and a general web search.
>> The last turned up a mailing list post where the author described how,
>> after switching to UWIN, he was able to build Kermit "straight out of
>> the box" with a slight mod to the linux target 9his makefile entry
>> fails on Cygwin, however). Nothing else turned up.
>>
>> > Unless someone has solved this very problem
>> >already on this list (unlikely since nobody has confessed as much),
>> >nobody is going to go to this trouble for you.
>>
>> I wouldn't expect anyone on this list to work out the particuars for
>> me if they weren't planning to build Kermit for themselves also. I
>> also expect that I will want to build other packages with Cygwin that
>> may require selecting makefile targets for specific systems. That is
>> why I asked the above question in more general terms. I would *still*
>> like to know which flavor of Unix Cygwin is based on, most closely
>> resembles, etc.!
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> --
>> Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>> Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>>
>
>
>--
>Want to unsubscribe from this list?
>Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
>
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
- Raw text -