Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
Regards,
KrUpTiOn
--- SBBSecho 3.04-Linux
* Origin: The New Frontier 2: thenewfrontier2.hopto.org (OH) (1:226/17)
On 11-08-18 04:58, Charles Stephenson wrote to All <=-
@TZ: 412c
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
On 11-08-18 04:58, Charles Stephenson wrote to All <=-
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
Nice one. :)
Now to break something else! actually, gona have to recompile
Synchronet. My DOS support is broken
On 11-09-18 10:32, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
Nice one. :)
Chad (Nugax) Helped me ALOT!
Now to break something else! actually, gona have to recompile
Synchronet. My DOS support is broken
@TZ: 412cNice one. :)
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
On 11-09-18 22:16, Hawkeye wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
@TZ: 003c
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Tony Langdon to Charles Stephenson on Fri Nov 09 2018 09:44:00
@TZ: 412cNice one. :)
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
Yeah this is on my wishlist too... hope I get it working with the documentation...
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!Nice one. :)
Yeah this is on my wishlist too... hope I get it working with the documentation...
any quick tips?
Finally got Syncronet connected to FidoNet!!
... A train won't run on a torn up track.
On 11-09-18 10:32, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah I haven't gone down that road. I run on a Pi, so DOS options are extremely limited anyway. :)
Re: Re: Finally!
Yeah this is on my wishlist too... hope I get it working with the documentation...
any quick tips?
On 11-14-18 17:37, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
@TZ: 412c
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Tony Langdon to Charles Stephenson on Sat Nov 10 2018 08:37 am
On 11-09-18 10:32, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah I haven't gone down that road. I run on a Pi, so DOS options are extremely limited anyway. :)
Wondering... can you run DOSEMU on your Pi?
On 11-14-18 17:37, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Wondering... can you run DOSEMU on your Pi?
No, no one can. DOSemu requires an X86 CPU.
On 11-15-18 08:39, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Wondering... can you run DOSEMU on your Pi?
No, no one can. DOSemu requires an X86 CPU.
I don't know much about Pi, I've been reading a little about them recently. They seem pretty neat. cool and cheaper way to run a BBS
without all the extra hardware. What kind of doors can you run? like linux-based only? (well... arm-campat.)?
Regards,
Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I don't know much about Pi, I've been reading a little about them recently. They seem pretty neat. cool and cheaper way to run a BBS
without all the extra hardware. What kind of doors can you run? like linux-based only? (well... arm-campat.)?
On 11-14-18 17:37, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
@TZ: 412c
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Tony Langdon to Charles Stephenson on Sat Nov 10 2018 08:37 am
On 11-09-18 10:32, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah I haven't gone down that road. I run on a Pi, so DOS options are extremely limited anyway. :)
Wondering... can you run DOSEMU on your Pi?
No, no one can. DOSemu requires an X86 CPU.
Yeah, I'd like to run my BBS on a Pi. Another benefit - they're silent! I have a server area in my storage space mostly because of the fan noise, otherwise I'd put it in the same cabinet as the cable modem in my bedroom.
On 11-16-18 14:11, Ragnarok wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Wondering... can you run DOSEMU on your Pi?
No, no one can. DOSemu requires an X86 CPU.
you can try with dosbox that run on Pi
On 11-16-18 09:23, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Charles Stephenson <=-
Yeah, I'd like to run my BBS on a Pi. Another benefit - they're silent!
I have a server area in my storage space mostly because of the fan
noise, otherwise I'd put it in the same cabinet as the cable modem in
my bedroom.
On 11-16-18 11:45, Nightfox wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
For a small quiet machine, I've thought about using an Intel NUC. I'm
not sure they're totally silent, but they're pretty quiet. Also they
use Intel processors, so the BBS could easily be run in Windows on a
NUC.
Not that I'd want to run a BBS under Windows. I'd be using Linux, whatever architecture I'm running on. I'm testing Magicka on an x84_64 netbook under Debian 9. :)
True, though I've heard mixed reports of success. And there's also Qemu with FreeDOS, which some have had success with.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Charles Stephenson on Fri Nov 16 2018
09:23 am
Yeah, I'd like to run my BBS on a Pi. Another benefit - they're s
have a server area in my storage space mostly because of the fan otherwise I'd put it in the same cabinet as the cable modem in my
For a small quiet machine, I've thought about using an Intel NUC.
I'm not sure they're totally silent, but they're pretty quiet. Also
they use Intel processors, so the BBS could easily be run in Windows
on a NUC.
On 11-16-18 17:04, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Not that I'd want to run a BBS under Windows. I'd be using Linux, whatever architecture I'm running on. I'm testing Magicka on an x84_64 netbook under Debian 9. :)
Any particular reason for avoiding Windows?
I've actually considered possibly moving my BBS from Windows to Linux, because I'm currently running my BBS in a Windows VM in a Linux host OS (where I'm running some server software), and I might want to simplify that machine a bit by removing the VM. But for now it's working.
Setting up DOS doors in a 32-bit Windows is fairly simple.. I've heard it's not that difficult to get DOS doors running in Linux with
Synchronet though. I do have one or two Win32 BBS doors that I'd lose
if I moved my BBS to Linux though.
On 11-16-18 17:07, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'm curious if FreeDOS is 100% compatible with MS-DOS, or if that
matters much. Also, since MS-DOS is no longer developed anymore, I
wonder if Microsoft has made it available in the public domain or something where it could legally be used for free. And for that
matter, if other DOS variants (such as IBM PC-DOS and Digital Research DR-DOS, etc.) have also been made availalbe for free use.
Not that I'd want to run a BBS under Windows. I'd be using Linux,
Any particular reason for avoiding Windows?
Yeah, mostly a case of using the right tool for the job. First Linux excels at automation through scripting. Secondly, it's resource efficient for server applications, because one doesn't need to run a GUI full time. You can simply fire up X only when you need to. With Windows, the GUI isn't optional. And there's the matter of updates. Almost all Linux
On 11-17-18 12:03, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
"Right tool for the job" could mean different things for a BBS. I
wanted to set up classic DOS BBS doors with my BBS, and aside from DOS,
a 32-bit Windows makes it very easy to run DOS doors - It can run DOS doors without any additional tools.
Also, there are server versions of Windows without a GUI too. At
least, not the full Windows GUI. I don't think you need to run the GUI Synchronet front-end in Windows - I've heard you can run it as a
Windows service if you wanted, which might work in a GUI-less server version of Windows.
I do like the graphical Synchronet control panel that it displays on
the BBS machine. I don't think the GUI adds too much overhead.. If
the machine has enough RAM and CPU power, a GUI isn't going to bog down
a BBS.
I haven't seen a version of Windows without a GUI, that's a new one for me. The versions of Windows Server (from NT 3.52 to Server 2008) I've run all came with the GUI.
But a server version of Windows - now you've
dramatically increased the cost. :( And are there still 32 bit server versions of Windows these days?
On 11-18-18 00:20, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
We have some server versions of Windows where I work, and I suppose
they do have a sort of minimal GUI - It's basically able to open a
command prompt window (or multiple command prompt windows) and that's about it, from what I recall.
I'm not sure if the very latest versions are available in 32-bit, but
if you're just interested in running a BBS, you could use an older version.
On 11-15-18 08:39, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
There are an increasing number of native doors. Also, doors/add-ons that are written for a specific BBS (e.g. MPL or Python for Mystic, or Javascript for Synchronet) will run fine.
Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah, I'd like to run my BBS on a Pi. Another benefit - they're silent! I have a server area in my storage space mostly because of the fan noise, otherwise I'd put it in the same cabinet as the cable modem in my bedroom.
Re: Re: Finally!of the time i don't think it spins. At present I'm using a Dell optiplex something or other, it was $59AU on ebay and uses an intel atom, it's
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Charles Stephenson on Fri Nov 16 2018
also very small (not as small as the nuc though, and not as powerful, but cheaper)
On 11-18-18 12:53, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
That's what I was wondering... There are some pretty good synchronet doors out. There's doors written for Pi?? Nice! :) l Am totally gonna
do some research on them. I would like to run a BBS on it...
On 11-18-18 12:58, Charles Stephenson wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I'm gonna prolly get a Pi and install Synchronet and run my main BBS
from it, in the near future. I love the small footprint. It makes
having a 'true' desktop/laptop seem kinda obsolete!
Re: Re: Finally!
By: apam to Nightfox on Sun Nov 18 2018 03:28 am
Re: Re: Finally!of the time i don't think it spins. At present I'm using a Dell optiplex something or other, it was $59AU on ebay and uses an intel atom, it's also very small (not as small as the nuc though, and not as powerful, but cheaper)
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Charles Stephenson on Fri Nov 16 2018
I'm using the Dell Optiplex 755 to run my BBSes on. paid 50 for mine off of the
Letgo app, works perfect! You're right, it's rather slow, but fast/good >enough for my BBSes (running Ubunutu). haven't had any noticable slow downs >running 6 BBSes on it...
Regards,
KrUpTiOn
--- SBBSecho 3.04-Linux
* Origin: The New Frontier 2: thenewfrontier2.hopto.org (OH) (1:226/17)
â– Synchronet â– Vertrauen â– Home of Synchronet â– [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
On 11-18-18 12:53, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
There were a couple of Linux doors released a month or two ago that I meant to install on my systems, but never got around to. :/ Open source, so they'd compile for the Pi fine. :)
On 11-18-18 12:58, Charles Stephenson wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I love the Pi, nice tiny system, and it runs a BBS really well. :)
What is the processor speed, had size and how many hard drives can you add to it?
On 11-18-18 23:23, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'm gonna give a look-see at your BBS running Pi, just curious about
what you did to it, and what it can do..
Something I'm thinking aboiut getting eventually
On 11-18-18 23:26, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Seems like the PERFECT peice of hardware for running a BBS... since it
has only what you need!
What is the processor speed, had size and how many hard drives can you add to it?
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Tony Langdon to Charles Stephenson on Mon Nov 19 2018 08:33 am
On 11-18-18 12:58, Charles Stephenson wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
I love the Pi, nice tiny system, and it runs a BBS really well. :)
Seems like the PERFECT peice of hardware for running a BBS... since it has only what you need!
On 11-18-18 23:23, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Still fairly stock, I've done most work on messaging. :) There are some changes to the chat options, but currently hidden menu items. Have to get around to fixing that. :)
On 11-18-18 23:26, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah does a pretty good job, perfect power consumption, and dead silent - no moving parts! :)
The OP was talking about a Dell, someone else mentioned an Optiplex 755. Something to keep in mind is that some of the higher-end Optiplexes have a RAID controller onboard - throw 2 cheap SATA drives in it and you have good insurance by setting it up as a mirror. I had one at work, think it was a 790.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Charles Stephenson to Tony Langdon on Sun Nov 18 2018 11:26 pm
it's not. get a dell optiplex from ebay for 40 bucks with free shipping. THAT is the perfect hardware for running a bbs.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Plt to Charles Stephenson on Sun Nov 18 2018 04:57 pm
What is the processor speed, had size and how many hard drives can you add
to it?
It's a dual core (Intel) 2.33. I have 6 Gigs of RAM and a 550 gig internal HDD >(a 1 gig external drive) you can add atleast one more drive to it, which I'm >planing on doing
Runs great for what I'm doing, haven't had ANY issues with it...
Regards,
KrUpTiOn
--- SBBSecho 3.04-Linux
* Origin: The New Frontier 2: thenewfrontier2.hopto.org (OH) (1:226/17)
â– Synchronet â– Vertrauen â– Home of Synchronet â– [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
I think I'm a..a... 'Mod-aholic'! lol... I change or add something to one of my BBSes every week! lol...
On 11-20-18 19:42, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Still fairly stock, I've done most work on messaging. :) There are some changes to the chat options, but currently hidden menu items. Have to get around to fixing that. :)
I think I'm a..a... 'Mod-aholic'! lol... I change or add something to
one of my BBSes every week! lol...
On 11-20-18 19:48, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I was thinking about getting one months ago, and run my Mystic BBS from it, but I run alot of DOS doors under linux(DOSEMU) and I was told that DOSEMU wouldn't work. Just reently heard I can use DOS Box, I think,
with the pi? So now it's got me intriged again!
I think I'm a..a... 'Mod-aholic'! lol... I change or add something
to one of my BBSes every week! lol...
Haha I'm more interested in functional stuff, messaging, etc, rather than changing the UI type stuff. :)
That's what I have now, Optiplex 755. I did just find a faster one on Facebook for 60. I paid 50 for mine. It's a very good chance I'm going to get that other one
Regards,
On 11-21-18 22:59, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
BBS mods can also be replacing some stock behavior with a script or
door that does the same thing in a different way.
Why not just buy a hp t5741 thin client PC from ebay? the're cheap and great, I paid $13 + 5 shipping and have been running my BBS and 4 game servers.
Re: Re: Finally!
I do enjoy adding mods to my BBS, to make it look a little bit different and unique. But I don't often change something once I've already modded it.
I also enjoy offering multiple options for things where available, such as message editors. And back in the day, I enjoyed adding 3rd-party file transfer protocols to my BBS when I ran one in DOS.
On 11-20-18 19:42, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Haha I'm more interested in functional stuff, messaging, etc, rather than changing the UI type stuff. :)
On 11-20-18 19:48, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I've heard mixed reports about DOSBox. It's certainly no good (without mods) in multinode environments, where multiple users are accessing the same files, because it doesn't have file locking support (equivalent to SHARE.EXE stuff).
I also enjoy offering multiple options for things where available,
such as message editors. And back in the day, I enjoyed adding
3rd-party file transfer protocols to my BBS when I ran one in DOS.
LOL! I did the same! Man...there were SO many transfer protocols! Old reliable Z and Y modem!
On 11-23-18 01:36, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I usually don't either, sometimes I get into my moods where I wanna
change EVERYthing, and then regret it later! lol
On 11-23-18 01:39, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I am gonna get a Pi eventually, just because I wanna play with it! Regards,
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Denn to Charles Stephenson on Thu Nov 22 2018 12:24 am
Why not just buy a hp t5741 thin client PC from ebay? the're cheap and great, I paid $13 + 5 shipping and have been running my BBS and 4 game servers.
I've never heard of them, I'll have to take a look now!
Thanks
Regards,
KrUpTiOn
--- SBBSecho 3.04-Linux
* Origin: The New Frontier 2: thenewfrontier2.hopto.org (OH) (1:226/17)
â– Synchronet â– Vertrauen â– Home of Synchronet â– [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Charles Stephenson to Nightfox on Fri Nov 23 2018 01:35 am
I also enjoy offering multiple options for things where available,
such as message editors. And back in the day, I enjoyed adding
3rd-party file transfer protocols to my BBS when I ran one in DOS.
LOL! I did the same! Man...there were SO many transfer protocols! Old reliable Z and Y modem!
Yes, and there were also MPT/Puma, BiModem, and others. :)
On 11-25-18 09:36, Digital Man wrote to Nightfox <=-
Fun fact: adding bi-directional file transfer support into WWIV (v4.22
I think it was) was one of my first-ever C programming efforts.
Fun fact: adding bi-directional file transfer support into WWIV (v4.22 I think it was) was one of my first-ever C programming efforts.
Bidirectional transfers are cool. I'm not sure I used it as a user, but I
On 11-25-18 16:50, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I used BiModem for bi-directional file transfers once or twice as a
user back in the day. It was cool when you actually had files to send
and receive at the same time, but not many BBSes in my area supported
it.
And HS/Link!
And HS/Link!
I've got a registered copy of it (with the fossil), but not sure how
to integrate it into SBBS. I had a link for that some time ago, but lost it.
On 11-25-18 16:50, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I used BiModem for bi-directional file transfers once or twice as a user back in the day. It was cool when you actually had files to send and receive at the same time, but not many BBSes in my area supported it.
Yeah other than offline download/upload, I didn't have much use for it as a user. Uploading files was a rare thing.
On 11-26-18 22:40, MRO wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
back in my day we had to upload files so we werent viewed as leeches.
back in my day we had to upload files so we werent viewed as leeches.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Charles Stephenson to Nightfox on Fri Nov 23 2018 01:35 am
LOL! I did the same! Man...there were SO many transfer protocols!
Old reliable Z and Y modem!
Yes, and there were also MPT/Puma, BiModem, and others. :)
On 11-23-18 01:36, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
LOL for me, UI stuff is too fiddly, it's actually easier to tweak my brain to adapt to the UI than the other way around. :D
On 11-23-18 01:39, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I am gonna get a Pi eventually, just because I wanna play with it!
Regards,
I'm sure you will have fun, they are great little boards for the price. :)
What version of windows come with it?
On 01:32 23/11 , Charles Stephenson wrote:
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Denn to Charles Stephenson on Thu Nov 22 2018 12:24 am
Why not just buy a hp t5741 thin client PC from ebay? the're cheap
and great, I paid $13 + 5 shipping and have been running my BBS
and 4 game servers.
On 11-28-18 01:50, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I totally agree! Being older now, my 'Get in the mood to change stuff' comes around less often, and when it does, I run with it!
On 11-28-18 01:51, Charles Stephenson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'm gonna get one after New Years, X-mas coming up, 2 of my kid's birthday... so ther's my 'extra' money til then! :(
Though, I'm not sure it would be ideal to set up a DOS-based file transfer N>protocol on a modern Synchronet, since it wouldn't support long filenames. I N>also wonder how well it would work when sending files over the internet. Als N>if someone has a modern BBS terminal program that supports external file N>transfer protocols, I'm not sure if a DOS-based file transfer program would b N>ideal there either.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Sun Nov 25 2018 09:36 am
Fun fact: adding bi-directional file transfer support into WWIV (v4.22 I think it was) was one of my first-ever C programming efforts.
Was that basically BiModem support, or was it another protocol?
Was that basically BiModem support, or was it another protocol?
The protocol used was up to the protocol driver used (so that could be BiModem or HS/Link or any other bi-directional file transfer protocol driver), so it (my WWIV mod) was tranfer protocol-neutral, like Synchronet.
on 11-29-18 11:42 Nightfox wrote to Digital Man <=-
Interesting.. Not sure I've heard the term "protocol driver" for a BBS before.
Interesting.. Not sure I've heard the term "protocol driver" for a
BBS before.
Probably a sign of the times and temrinology, but yeah we called them "external protocols" back then.
On 11-29-18 16:57, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Probably a sign of the times and temrinology, but yeah we called them "external protocols" back then.
I'm familiar with external protocols. I ran a BBS back in the day from 1994 to 2000 and had several external protocols set up. As a BBS user,
I had also set up some external protocols in my communications
software. The way Digital Man described his bi-directional file
transfer support, it sounded like it could work with any protocol. I'm just not sure how that specifically worked (for instance, with Zmodem
or a 3rd-party protocol such as HS/Link).
on 11-29-18 11:42 Nightfox wrote to Digital Man <=-
Interesting.. Not sure I've heard the term "protocol driver" for a BBS before.
Probably a sign of the times and temrinology, but yeah we called them "external protocols" back then.
Re: Re: Finally!
By: Digital Man to Nightfox on Wed Nov 28 2018 11:01 pm
Was that basically BiModem support, or was it another protocol?
The protocol used was up to the protocol driver used (so that could be BiModem or HS/Link or any other bi-directional file transfer protocol driver), so it (my WWIV mod) was tranfer protocol-neutral, like Synchronet.
Interesting.. Not sure I've heard the term "protocol driver" for a BBS before.
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 325 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 222:40:31 |
| Calls: | 508 |
| Messages: | 219857 |