WRONG!

[Sanford 'Sandy' Zelkovitz]

The following are my replys to WRONGLY stated comments:


> The messages are in a non-standard format with all messages stuffed into
> one huge file.  The messages are limited to a compile time maximum length.

Firstly, what is a standard message???? The message base is INDEXED for rapid
retrieval. Secondly, the writter stated that the messages are limited to a
compile time maximum length. The message length is limited to 20 lines of 72
characters per line. This was intentionally done to limit the amount of disk
space.


> | 16) Message of the day (pre-selected)

> This is a hardcoded filename (the date) whose contents get printed out.

This happens to be a VERY efficient way of doing it!!!!!! This way, you can
make up your messages for the future and they will be listed on the appropriate
days. BTW, since you don't like the file name as being made up of the date, 
what would you like, with the idea that the software has to find it on the
proper date?????


| 18) The following file protocols are available for downloading:
     sliding windows/standard kermit, zmodem, ymodem, batch-ymodem, crc-xmodem,
|     checksum-xmodem, ascii, SEAlink, and type.
| 19) The following file protocols are available for uploading:
|     (Same as downloading except for "type")

> All the file transfer protocols are external programs - you must have them
> on your system to be able to use them.

The file protocols are available on my system. Even the ones thast AREN'T
included in the over compressed tar file! You see, the ONLY ones that aren't
in the tar file are kermit and rzsz, which most users already have! Why make
the file file larger than necessary????


| 20) List the contents of an archive file ( .arc, .tar, or .tar.Z )

> This requires that you have a working copy of ARC on your system...

The source code is available on my system and has been sent MANY times through
the net.


| 21) File directory summary

> Simply a "ls -l directory > file ; cat file > modemport ; rm file" sequence

I hate to use profanity on the net, but you are COMPLETLEY wrong! The file
summary option, for your information, lists the file statistics within the
directory. This option lists, according to date groups, how namy files have
been accessed, modified, or changed. Then it lists, according to size groups,
how many files fall within this limit. Next time, I suggest you KNOW what you
are talking about!

| 22) List all, new, or matched files

> See 21 with a few additions

I wish I could write out what I am thinking now; however, I do not want to
disobey the net rules! Firstly, the output format is nearly the same as
Fido and Opus ( if that is an ls -l, I'll eat my hat! ). The list all
format, lists all of the files that are mentioned in the file, files.bbs,
along with the "canned" description for each file. The output, as stated
before, is nearly the same as Fido and Opus. The new list is basically the
same as the previous list; however, it only outputs the files that are NEW
for the user. This is something that Opus and Fido can't do. The matched
file list, again, is nearly the same but only outputs the file list that
matches the user supplied substring.


| 40) 100% "C" code using SysV termio

>But not all of the code is supplied - you must find your own source for kermit,
> arc, ...... (see above)

As stated before, IT IS SUPPLIED is additional files!!

| P.S.  The full source code can be retrived from my system (750K uncompressed)

> Before you rush out and download it, be warned:

>	1) The code is *VERY* unstructured.  It looks as if the code was
>	   written over a long period of time without any thought to 
>	   combining similar features - there are several places where
>	   the code prints out the contents of a file (Message areas, 
>	   file areas, ...) and the routines are bulk copies of each other
>	   with one or two quoted strings changed.  Even the (wrong) comments
>	   are the same!
	
It's funny, you are the ONLY one that has said that the code is unstructured!
There are 134 VERY happy users of the code to code. As a matter of a fact,
MANY large computer companies have praised me for how well structured it is!

There may be some code that is duplicated; however, each subroutine is unique!

>	2) The code makes extensive use of the system() call to do even
>	   the easiest of things.  The code is quite slow when it comes to
>	   these sections!

I really wish you knew what you were talking about! The protocols are called
via system calls and the raw listing.
	
>	3) The message base, file handling, and bulletins (motd and others)
>	   use non-standard layouts and fixed length record formats.

They are MY format; therefore they are standard for xbbs!

>	4) The code consists of one HUGE source file (107K) and about a
>	   dozen small (< 5K) additions.  Many of the parts share the
>	   same comments - indicating that they all began life as the
>	   same source file - (e.g., many claim to be "file area" listers
>	   in the comments, even though the code prints out things like
>	   "Message Areas".)

Well, here goes proof of another bunch of garbage!
file           size                   file             size
bbsc1.c        67158                  bbsc2.c          38111
bbscadds.c      3734                  bbscarea.c        3591
bbscbult.c      5029                  bbsconf.c         5431
bbscfile.c     15675                  bbscio.c          2298
bbsclist.c      3012                  bbscclock.c       2259
bbscmisc.c      1410                  bbscmsga.c        7555
bbscport.c      7701                  bbscqust.c        3219
bbsczip.c       4101


> If you are interested in doing a lot of work, his code isn't too bad
> a starting place, but instead of hawking its new features he should
> be cleaning up what he has.  This code is definitely not "comp.sources.unix"
> quality - it just squeaks by as being something that comp.sources.misc would
> appreciate.  (Sorry Brandon... :-)

My lawyer will be VERY interested in the above comments along with previous
comments!

> I tried to talk to Sandy about this stuff (voice, my dime) and he implied
> that he wasn't interested in anything I had to say.  So be warned that things
> don't look like they will get any better in the future...

I don't even know who you are!

MY COMMENTS
___________

I have NO idea why you would make my code sound so bad on the net. I only wish
that you can sleep well at night after liabling me as much as you did. I am
sure you will NOT hear the end of this.


Sanford 'Sandy' Zelkovitz


>    -John

> -- 
> Comp.Unix.Microport is now unmoderated!  Use at your own risk :-)