From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed May 3 21:54:34 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id VAA18886 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 3 May 1995 21:54:34 -0700 Received: from trout.sri.MT.net (trout.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.12]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA18880 for ; Wed, 3 May 1995 21:54:31 -0700 Received: (from nate@localhost) by trout.sri.MT.net (8.6.11/8.6.11) id WAA14083; Wed, 3 May 1995 22:58:40 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 May 1995 22:58:40 -0600 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199505040458.WAA14083@trout.sri.MT.net> To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov (Sean Kelly) Cc: gibbs@estienne.CS.Berkeley.EDU, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, daveh@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: slattach!!!!!!! In-Reply-To: <9505040331.AA01544@yarmouth.fsl.noaa.gov> References: <199505032352.QAA00645@estienne.cs.berkeley.edu> <9505040331.AA01544@yarmouth.fsl.noaa.gov> Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Aye. You should all just give up and succomb to expect. Actually, > expect is a really interesting tool, and has a lot more fascinating > uses than just automating your PPP connections. Actually, in the case of PPP/SLIP, I think expect is overkill. Chat does the job very well and is already part of the system. I have not yet found a case where expect works any better than a decent CHAT script, and there are good examples of complex CHAT scripts in the O'Reilly UUCP books. Nate