Hello Torsten.
ML> He would prefer to receive everything uncompressed, but I'm not sure
ML> that Squish can do this.
TB> Well, no, squish can't sent echomail uncompressed by default. But,
TB> if you define a different squish.cfg witout any packer defintions,
TB> all pakets will be uncompressed.
After reading throught the documentation, this is the same conclusion I came
to. But switching back and forth for one Node would be, at best, impractical.
TB> If you want to sent netmail without compression, do a 'squish out'
TB> without 'squash'.
Yes, and the same is true for an EchoMail outbound scan, but the outbound
directory would become a nightmare. It's a Binkley style outbound and Binkley
doesn't recognise uncompressed packets IIRC; Internet Rex does, but tends to
miss some from time-to-time.
TB> Compressing mail was one of the main features of squish.
Indeed. It was, if I'm not mistaken, one of the first tossers that did it
automatically, first to the FidoNet ARC standard, then expanding out to handle
multiple archivers/unarchivers.
MarK Lewis pointed out that now-a-days it hardly makes sense to waste compute
cycles to archive outbound packets due to the connectivity via the internet
now commonly utilised; but still, there are traditional Binkley based mailers
that require compressed mail bundles with their attendant .?LO files. I still
have users that come in over POTS line and get their mail and others that
telnet into the system to Binkley and pick up mail that way. I'm just going to
leave everything alone... It's been working for the last 25 years with few
major failures. :-)
TB> Possibly hpt/fastecho can handle uncompressed mail, but I really
TB> don't know this, because im not using one of them.
Every one that I can think of does so, in fact, I believe it's an FTS
requirement.
Best regards - Herzliche Gre,
Marc
--- timEd/2 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Sursum Corda! BBS-Huntsville,AL-bbs.sursum-corda.com (1:396/45)
|
