Newsgroups: news.software.b Path: utzoo!henry From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) Subject: Re: C news compatibility (was Re: Patch dates or Patch Numbers) Message-ID: <1989Aug19.223016.23702@utzoo.uucp> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology References: <1989Aug9.164003.20669@utzoo.uucp> <6717@dayton.UUCP> <1989Aug18.102335.17269@utstat.uucp> <64125@uunet.UU.NET> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 89 22:30:16 GMT In article <64125@uunet.UU.NET> rick@uunet.UU.NET (Rick Adams) writes: >... The RFC was an attempt to document the behavior of Bnews. That is its origin. However, it does not say "this is the standard for the behavior of B News", it says "this is the standard for news transmission". And it does say "standard". Definitions of the C language started out more or less as documentation of the behavior of Dennis Ritchie's C compiler, but these days the compilers are written to match the standards, not vice versa. Same thing for RFC1036: its flaws and origin notwithstanding, it is written as an implementation-independent standard for news transmission, and we treat it as such. >... Where the RFC and Bnews differ the >behavior of Bnews should generall be considered correct. Um, considered by who? This is like AT&T saying "where POSIX and System V differ, the behavior of System V should be considered correct". The older documents that POSIX is derived from did originate as an attempt to document the behavior of System V, but these days the standard is the primary document. RFC1036 says it is the standard; we believe it. On a more pragmatic note, there are a couple of very serious problems with taking B News's behavior as the standard. One is that it's a moving target: B2.11 differs from B2.10.1 in important ways. (Some of the B2.11 <-> C News differences arise because some of C News predates 2.11.) Another is that finding out what that behavior *is* can be very difficult. Geoff had to resort to the B News code to figure out ihave/sendme, since RFC1036's description is simply inadequate. It took him a long time. The groaning, swearing, and complaining were something to hear. The B News code is not practical as a standards document. >To me (and just about everyone else) backwards compatible means behaves >the same as Bnews... As I've said in another article, there is more than one aspect of compatibility involved here, and we are backward compatible in most of the ones that matter to most people. >You are doing everyone a great disservice claiming that it is >backwards compatible. Anyone who has tried to use Cnews will tell >you that it is not. Many people who have tried, and succeeded, and continued using it, tell us that it is. Rick, you have some special problems, given the enormous size of your sys file and your complex administrative situation. We recognize this, and in the past have offered to help (specifically, to take a look at your sys file and shell programs for compatibility problems). But most sites do not have the problems you have with even the slightest change to the sysadmin interface, and find C News's major-although-imperfect backward compatibility adequate for their purposes. -- V7 /bin/mail source: 554 lines.| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1989 X.400 specs: 2200+ pages. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu