Bunbatch missing: remove or add it?
rra at stanford.edu
Sat Aug 4 17:54:40 UTC 2007
Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> writes:
> There is currently two batch processors: c7unbatch and gunbatch. But
> there is also a mention of bunbatch in inncheck (which checks the
> presence of bunbatch) and in send-uucp.in:
> my %UNBATCHER = (
> compress => 'cunbatch',
> bzip2 => 'bunbatch',
> gzip => 'gunbatch',
> I have two questions:
> * does it currently work with cunbatch here, instead of c7unbatch?
> * should bunbatch be removed everywhere, or simply added?
> (exec <path-to-bzip2> -d -c)
Ideally, it would be nice if a UUCP user could comment on this, since I
really don't know what they use and how. Note, though, that there isn't a
one-to-one correspondance between the unbatcher names (which go on the #!
line of batches) and programs provided by INN. For example, rnews handles
cunbatch internally and only tries to run an external program if the
unbatcher is something else. c7unbatch is a weird legacy thing used for
links that aren't 8-bit clean and probably isn't very important any more.
My guess is that the right solution is to add a bunbatch script similar to
the existing gunbatch one.
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.
More information about the inn-workers