Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-Id: <200010091414.e99EERr16075@laxmls02.socal.rr.com>
X-Sender: cloder AT pop-server DOT socal DOT rr DOT com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 07:17:07 -0700
To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Chad Loder <cloder AT acm DOT org>
Subject: Re: Building C-Kermit (6.0.192) with Cygwin 1.1
In-Reply-To: <000801c03159$9bfeeec0$92d698d1@shellware.com>
References: <L8L35gtMC1zf092yn AT cinenet DOT net>
 <20001005141101 DOT C20946 AT cygnus DOT com>
 <0s635gtMCtrU092yn AT cinenet DOT net>
 <8096-Sun08Oct2000100240+0100-starksb AT ebi DOT ac DOT uk>
 <6wK45gtMCNwB092yn AT cinenet DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

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