Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA15535; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:56:20 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.7); Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:56:04 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA15478; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:56:01 -0500 Received: from taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk (cusexim@taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.48]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA15459; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:55:46 -0500 Received: from ph10 by taurus.cus.cam.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.592 #2) id 0vhdra-0003li-00; Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:54:54 +0000 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:54:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Philip Hazel To: Jack De Winter cc: drums@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: LF vs CRLF In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107102714.00e2e540@lacroix> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Jack De Winter wrote: > Is there any idea how old these systems are that are accepting the LF > without the CR? Maybe they are just older systems that need a couple > of lines of code to get upgraded? Here's the code from smail 3.1.29 for reading an smtp response. This is not the latest version of smail, but pretty recent (I think smail 3.2 has been out less than a year): while ((c = getc(f)) != '\n' && c != EOF) { STR_NEXT(&input, c); } if (input.p[input.i - 1] == '\r') { input.p[input.i - 1] = '\0'; } else { STR_NEXT(&input, '\0'); } -- Philip Hazel University Computing Service, ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG, P.Hazel@ucs.cam.ac.uk England. Phone: +44 1223 334714