Skip Navigational Links
LISTSERV email list manager
LISTSERV - COMMUNITY.EMAILOGY.COM
LISTSERV Menu
Log In
Log In
LISTSERV 17.5 Help - LSTSRV-L Archives
LISTSERV Archives
LISTSERV Archives
Search Archives
Search Archives
Register
Register
Log In
Log In

LSTSRV-L Archives

LISTSERV Site Administrators' Forum

LSTSRV-L

Menu
LISTSERV Archives LISTSERV Archives
LSTSRV-L Home LSTSRV-L Home

Log In Log In
Register Register

Subscribe or Unsubscribe Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives Search Archives
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
why is GLOBAL LIST being truncated to 80 characters?
From:
Greg Kroll <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Forum on LISTSERV release 1.7
Date:
Wed, 2 Oct 1991 08:59:37 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
It has been brought to my attention that the LIST GLOBAL command is sending
the "List of Lists" in an 80 column format.  Why?  Since the default format
is Netdata shouldn't I being getting the file in it's LRECL=122 format?
Several quick tests reveals:
 
list global             * default, netdata, 80 column records, not what I
                          expected
list global f=netdata   * 80 column records, not what I expected
list global f=diskdump  * 80 column records, not what I expected
list global f=carddump  * "peeking" the file it appears to be in a "disk
                           dump" format, however, the VM/CMS receive command
                           does not properly format the file.
list global f=punch     * 80 columns, as expected
list global f=mail      * normal mail, 80 columns, as expected
list global f=lpunch    * "normal" LPUNCH format.  Is there a program/command
                           available to decipher this?
list global f=uuencode  * "normal" uuencode format, as expected
 
Am I missing something?  Have I always been looking at this file in its
current truncated format and just never noticed?  Isn't "netdata" format
supposed to allow greater than 80 column records?  Thanks for any
insights or suggestions!
 
--Greg Kroll

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

COMMUNITY.EMAILOGY.COM CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV