Talk:UUCP

Computing: Networking / Software / Free and open-source software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Protocol Stack

Not really sure what that table is doing adjacent to the first paragaph. Uucp isn't part of the tcp/ip stack. Jeh 09:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From reading the first couple of paragraphs of the article, I'm inclined to agree, so have removed the template. - IMSoP 12:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yah. It's of mostly historical interest only, of course. Maybe I'll do a template showing the relationship of the various uucp protocols to the ISO layers. Trouble is that it isn't that direct a mapping.

Good, no, GREAT job on the "tidying", by the way. Thank you! Jeh 17:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

History...no, Technology and current use

I added a citation about current use of UUCP in real-world retail applications, first to history but then to technology as it seemed more sensible since its use is current.

I am a former employee of Aporpos RMS/CRS/Epicor|CRS and was directly involved, as a systems engineer, in setting up and maintaining these installation. I am a long-time supporter of UUCP, largely because it is free and interoperable. It had been in use at Apropos from very early on...SCO Xenix was the first platform for Apropos' retail and corporate products.

I first made use of UUCP in 1996 when I re-wrote the eccentric DOS-based-but-ported-to-Unix polling system included in Synchronics POS that required dedicated modems and had to be kicked off by an in-store manager (ergo, not automatic). With UUCP and shell scripting I had a solution that was resilient and flexible, supporting file transfer and email, plus pager notification when problems crept up.

The use of UUCP on Windows at Apropos began in 2003 as Apropos began to distribute a new Windows-based retail product, supported by Unix/Linux servers at corporate. We built the source RPM for Taylor on a Cygwin installation and found it worked immediately without modification. We refused to give up some of the flexibility and freedom of Linux, so Cygwin became part of the required installation on the Windows systems, using cron to execute routine tasks, and sshd to allow remote admin without interrupting the use of the workstation as a register.

I think UUCP has declined only because Win/DOS became so dominant, and later Unix/Linux admins were only ever familiar with file transfer via FTP or RCP. UUCP was wrongly associated only with use on serial connections, including dialup. The addition of the TCP channel simply made it contemporary. Adding a natively encrypted channel might be the next logical step, though UUCP should instead, IMHO, be used across existing secure channels (intranets, VPNs). Scotharkins 1822 UTC 10 December 2006

P stands for Protocol?

I think I've read somewhere that UUCP stands for "Unix to Unix Copy Protocol". Can anybody confirm or deny this?--88.149.231.229 10:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that UUCP stands for Unix to Unix Copy Program, as compared to the original UNIX program cp which performs copies locally. DavidDouthitt (Talk) 17:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David, you are correct in both the meaning and the etymology. uucp was named as a nod to the cp program and there are a large number of manuals from unix systems that spell this out as "Unix to Unix copy". Jeh 18:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to open this back up again. In the BSD single-user passwd file it reads as '_uucp:*:4:4:Unix to Unix Copy Protocol'... --Martinor (talk) 09:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, whoever wrote that got it wrong. uucp involves several different possible protocols - there is no single "uucp protocol." The command "uucp" is used at a shell prompt to request that a file be copied to another system - just as the "cp" command would be used for a local copy. Hence, "unix to unix copy". Note also that the command "uucp" does not directly start running any of the line protocols associated with uucp. That is the job of another program, "uucico", which stands for "uu copy in copy out" and usually runs as a daemon. Jeh (talk) 09:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UUCP still in use

If former providers dont offer UUCP routing, the protocol is still in use for some users around the world, mainly over SSH protocol.

You could, from time to time, observe such a UUCP header accros the thousands of mails you could receive or transmit. Asr (talk) 14:30, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hosts reachable directly by TCP/IP

The statement "DNS system is only appropriate for hosts reachable directly by TCP/IP" isn't entirely true. I registered the coat.com domain about a year before our company was connected to the Internet, and used it for sending and receiving mail. Our hosts didn't have DNS A records, but did have MX records that pointed to a gateway which connected to us via uucp. Sendmail hacks did the @-to-!-to-@ rewriting so our site acted like it was on the Internet as far as email was concerned. --ABehrens (talk) 19:01, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Guy Harris (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unix-to-Unix Copy Program

I (apparently falsely) believed that UUCP meant "Unix-to-Unix Copy Program" - rather than simply "Unix-to-Unix Copy" - until I read this article.

Searching the web for "Unix-to-Unix Copy Program" shows that I'm not alone.

Whether this is notable enough to include in the article - I will let others decide.

Best, 173.13.156.125 (talk) 12:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that a comment in a section above mentions "Unix to Unix Copy Program".

My apologies for missing that before.

Best, 173.13.156.125 (talk) 10:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on UUCP. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071209223322/http://www.uucp.org/uumap/ to http://www.uucp.org/uumap/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]