I'm thinking about connecting my local (internal) rPI bbs to fsxNet (this BBS will never be publicly accessible). Ideally, I would like to be able to poll my primary public BBS for echomail messages so I don't bother a HUB with too many polls (and a dynamic IP). Do I need to apply for a node number to accomplish this?
You can do it that way but I just use points off my AKA to do that, 21:4/106.1 for example.
On 11-10-18 16:00, eggy wrote to All <=-
I'm thinking about connecting my local (internal) rPI bbs to fsxNet
(this BBS will never be publicly accessible). Ideally, I would like to
be able to poll my primary public BBS for echomail messages so I don't bother a HUB with too many polls (and a dynamic IP). Do I need to apply for a node number to accomplish this?
You can do it that way but I just use points off my AKA to do that, 21:4/106.1 for example.
I'm trying to get this to work, but I most likely don't quite have something setup correctly. I'm trying to send netmail to 23:4/143 from 23:4:143.1 as a test, but its failing to import on 23:4/143 with a nodes busy in the logs.. I'm not sure what I've missed or what this error means?
You can do it that way but I just use points off my AKA to do that, 21:4/106.1 for example.
On 11-10-18 19:21, eggy wrote to All <=-
@TZ: 4168
On 11/10/18, Al said the following...
You can do it that way but I just use points off my AKA to do that, 21:4/106.1 for example.
I'm trying to get this to work, but I most likely don't quite have something setup correctly. I'm trying to send netmail to 23:4/143 from 23:4:143.1 as a test, but its failing to import on 23:4/143 with a
nodes busy in the logs.. I'm not sure what I've missed or what this
error means?
On 11/10/18, Al pondered and said...
You can do it that way but I just use points off my AKA to do that, 21:4/106.1 for example.
Yep Al is correct Eggy, you could essentially HUB for you other system
and have it poll your main node :)
Hmm, busy errors sound like either something is still processing elsewhere, or there's a stale semaphore lying around.Yeah, I got it sorted out. There were some stale semaphore files lying around causing me issues. I also noticed for some my typoes ;)`
Oh, and I think you mean 21:..., I didn't know we had a Z23. ;)
I do that exact same thing with HotDogEd on my Android. This works very well and is pretty much seamless.
The only thing where I need to test a little bit more is with netmail. That works as well by the Origin becomes the point, some more testing
for that one too I guess...
I can confirm, I was able to get this working (including netmail) using the point suggestion with Mystic on my local rPi v3. This means I can explore networking with ENiGMA½ and Magicka without causing too much trouble. Both of these projects have caught my attention as they are actively developed (and open source).
On 11-11-18 09:37, eggy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@TZ: 4168
Hmm, busy errors sound like either something is still processing elsewhere, or there's a stale semaphore lying around.
Oh, and I think you mean 21:..., I didn't know we had a Z23. ;)
Yeah, I got it sorted out. There were some stale semaphore files lying around causing me issues. I also noticed for some my typoes ;)`
Glad to see another person wanting to try out ENiG! Let me know if you
run into
issues. Apam is always more than willing to help with Magicka as well!
Haven't looked at Enig yet, another interesting looking system.
On Sunday, November 11th eggy muttered...
I can confirm, I was able to get this working (including netmail) usi the point suggestion with Mystic on my local rPi v3. This means I can explore networking with ENiGMA½ and Magicka without causing too much trouble. Both of these projects have caught my attention as they are actively developed (and open source).
Glad to see another person wanting to try out ENiG! Let me know if you
run into issues. Apam is always more than willing to help with Magicka
as well!
On 11-11-18 17:01, Tiny wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Haven't looked at Enig yet, another interesting looking system.
It's another interesting one. The reason I chose MagickaBBS over
Enig was stupid. I was able to figure out how to configure MagickaBBS quicker then Enig. Having said that: /now/ I could start over with
either one and have it configured in the same evening.
something setup correctly. I'm trying to send netmail to 23:4/143 from 23:4:143.1 as a test, but its failing to import on 23:4/143 with a nodes
Networking to fsxNet seems to be the most complicated part coming from Mystic BBS, where Mystic handles everything for you all in one package. I'm not clear if I need to setup binkd for ENiMA.. or if the bso module will handle it for me? Is there a fsxNet config example somewhere I can follow?
-=> On 11-11-18 12:47, NuSkooler wrote to eggy <=-
sysops can get it up and running more quickly. :) Haven't looked at Enig yet, another interesting looking system.
So many BBSs, so little time! :D
Haven't looked at Enig yet, another interesting looking system.
It's another interesting one. The reason I chose MagickaBBS over Enig
was stupid. I was able to figure out how to configure MagickaBBS quicker then Enig. Having said that: /now/ I could start over with either one
and have it configured in the same evening.
I've been playing with Enigma for awhile off and on. Pretty good and flexible system. The reason why I haven't jumped into it further is,
I'm a JSON noobie, and it's config is all JSON....
???-=> On 11-14-18 16:45, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I've been playing with Enigma for awhile off and on. Pretty good flexible system. The reason why I haven't jumped into it further
I'm a JSON noobie, and it's config is all JSON....
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
On 11-15-18 14:05, apam wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It's called a text editor :P
Seriously though, JSON is much easier with a decent text editor with syntax highlighting support for it. I've been using JSON in my new BBS, and filling it out with Visual Studio 2017, which lets me know if I
have any errors in my JSON file.
-=> On 11-14-18 16:45, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
???-=> On 11-14-18 16:45, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
It's called a text editor :P
@TZ: 412c
Re: Re: fsxNet Node Request
By: Vk3jed to KrUpTiOn on Thu Nov 15 2018 02:25 pm
-=> On 11-14-18 16:45, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
Agreed, and a few other fellow SysOps/buddies came to the same
conclusion, but it's not a top priority on the author's to-do list. If
it was easier to configure, I would have made it one of my main BBS's instead of a test one. Regards,
Re: Re: fsxNet Node Request
By: apam to Vk3jed on Thu Nov 15 2018 02:05 pm
???-=> On 11-14-18 16:45, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
It's called a text editor :P
A text editor won't show you how to use JSON.. :)
A text editor won't show you how to use JSON.. :) Regards, KrUpTiOn
-=> On 11-15-18 08:19, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds like Enig could do with a configuration utility. :)
Agreed, and a few other fellow SysOps/buddies came to the same
conclusion, but it's not a top priority on the author's to-do list.
If it was easier to configure, I would have made it one of my main
BBS's instead of a test one. Regards,
Maybe an interested third party with JSON and programming knowledge could write something?
Re: Re: fsxNet Node Request
By: apam to Vk3jed on Thu Nov 15 2018 02:05 pm
A text editor won't show you how to use JSON.. :)
No, but the mountain of existing JSON in the config file in addition to a text editor that detects any new JSON errors you add it shouldn't be too hard.
Just look at what's already there and copy the format. It's not like you're writing a JSON file from scratch. Also, enigma uses HJSON, which
is more lenient on errors.
On Thursday, November 15th KrUpTiOn was heard saying...
FWIW, there are many JSON editors out there. ENiG uses HJSON by default, but gladly accepts pure JSON (it's backwards compatible)...so you could use one of these editors.
A person in #enigma-bbs was just talking about creating a simple ENiG editor / GUI though, so maybe something is in the pipe...
Configuring Enigma compared to the 'average feature packed' BBS
program, is like knowing english and trying to learn French without a tutor. It's a Good/Bad thing. Good because Enigma is super
configurable, and feature-rich, bad, because of the same reason. If
it was a basic bare-bones package it would be easier to learn the
basic functions. But who wants a boring empty BBS program. For a
totally new SysOp, Enigma isn't for that person.... Regards,
Agreed, and a few other fellow SysOps/buddies came to the same
conclusion, but it's not a top priority on the author's to-do list.
If it was easier to configure, I would have made it one of my main
BBS's instead of a test one. Regards,
Maybe an interested third party with JSON and programming knowledge could write something?
THAT would be a GREAT idea... If I could I would. I do like enigma. has
a old school 'warez' board feel to it...
On 11-17-18 08:15, apam wrote to KrUpTiOn <=-
I disagree. In fact I would say it's probably better for a totally new sysop, because they aren't coming at it with preconceived Ideas on what configuration should be like.
I disagree. In fact I would say it's probably better for a totally new sysop, because they aren't coming at it with preconceived Ideas on what configuration should be like.
What it boils down to is can you modify a JSON text file. Enigma 1/2 was my first real experience with JSON, and I don't think it was as hard as people are making it out to be. I modified it, it didn't work, so I went in and found my mistakes and fixed them.
Yeah, I don't know JSON, so I can't help there. :(
Especially with docs stating to change the 'boardName' value, I can't see how >this would be /that/ confusing.
Especially with docs stating to change the 'boardName' value, I can't see how this would be /that/ confusing.
On 11-17-18 12:09, NuSkooler wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@TZ: 41a4
On Friday, November 16th Vk3jed muttered...
Yeah, I don't know JSON, so I can't help there. :(
Do you need to understand HJSON/JSON to figure this out though?
{
general: {
// this is a comment!
boardName: Your BBS Name
}
}
Especially with docs stating to change the 'boardName' value, I can't
see how this would be /that/ confusing.
In theory no, until you happen to accidentally nuke one of the brackets when editing. :D
There was a time when everything in linux/unix was configured by text files. I think the need for a "configuration editor" is more lazyness
than anything. Something that will save someone from reading the
documents and spending a bit of time and effort themselves.
Maybe it's unjustified a bit, but it kind of bothers me when people say
this software should have x, y and z and I'd use it if it had x, y and z like it's incomplete and poor software if it doesn't have x, y and z because more than likely you go and implement x, y and z and then they want a, b and c.
The whole talk of things like Enigma would be awesome if it had a configuration editor (because the person is too lazy to configure it) or even as suttle as Enigma needs a configuration editor. Like enigma is lacking or not awesome without it. It's a massive piece of work, it *is* already awesome and people are using it and it works well.
I know this is a bit of a rant, and not really directed at you tony, and perhaps not even directed at bbsing people entirely because the same
thing happens in most opensource or free offerings where people build stuff in their spare time.
The balances to strike in this area are between ease of use,
functionality, end user expectations, and on goes the list. I don't necessarily think it's lazy to use a config editor especially if you
come from a background let's say with no prior experience in doing
anything at a text editor level.
I agree it's a great bit of coding effort and Nu should be rightly
proud of it. I also think everyone can offer feedback if they want to
and others can choose to accept it and incorporate if they wish to
(or not). Developing in a vacuum especially when trying to create
something to be used by others, would likely be a far worse space to operate in I think.
functionality, end user expectations, and on goes the list. I don't necessarily think it's lazy to use a config editor especially if you come from a background let's say with no prior experience in doing anything at a text editor level.
Sure, if a configuration editor exists, then by all means use it. I'm not saying using a configuration editor is lazy, I'm saying expecting someone else to program a configuration editor for free, when you could spend a fraction of the time learning how to configure it with a text file is lazy.
On 11/18/18, apam pondered and said...
functionality, end user expectations, and on goes the list. I necessarily think it's lazy to use a config editor especially
come from a background let's say with no prior experience in anything at a text editor level.
Sure, if a configuration editor exists, then by all means use it. saying using a configuration editor is lazy, I'm saying expecting
else to program a configuration editor for free, when you could s fraction of the time learning how to configure it with a text fil lazy.
Yep I get what you're saying the point I'm trying to make is that not everyone may be comfortable nor have much experience in editing a
text file and so assuming they are lazy because they don't want to
touch it without the assistance of a config tool seems a little
misguided to me.
So long as the docs set an expectation of what is required to be done
to configure software then I think it's fine that people opt in to
using it on that basis.
If they suggest something they think is going to help the software
then I think that's OK to. If they say this software barks because
it's missing x,y,z then I don't think that's the best way to motivate
a developer to include the feedback being given. :)
In the end the developer has the last say in how the software works
and the end user has the last say on if they will or won't use it.
There was a time when everything in linux/unix was configured by text files. I think the need for a "configuration editor" is more lazyness
than anything. Something that will save someone from reading the
documents and spending a bit of time and effort themselves.
-=> On 11-15-18 23:34, KrUpTiOn wrote to Vk3jed <=-
THAT would be a GREAT idea... If I could I would. I do like enigma.
has a old school 'warez' board feel to it...
Yeah, I don't know JSON, so I can't help there. :(
On 11-17-18 12:09, NuSkooler wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Especially with docs stating to change the 'boardName' value, I
can't see how this would be /that/ confusing.
In theory no, until you happen to accidentally nuke one of the brackets when editing. :D
Even if it doesn't, you can open up the text editor go to where you were editing and see if it looks like it should..
There was a time when everything in linux/unix was configured by text files. I think the need for a "configuration editor" is more lazyness
than anything. Something that will save someone from reading the
documents and spending a bit of time and effort themselves.
The whole talk of things like Enigma would be awesome if it had a configuration editor (because the person is too lazy to configure it) or even as suttle as Enigma needs a configuration editor. Like enigma is lacking or not awesome without it. It's a massive piece of work, it *is* already awesome and people are using it and it works well.
I know this is a bit of a rant, and not really directed at you tony, and perhaps not even directed at bbsing people entirely because the same
thing happens in most opensource or free offerings where people build stuff in their spare time.
In fact, I think Enigma 1/2 would probably end up being more complicated with a config editor to learn. It's so customizable, a config editor would need tons of buttons and switches (which you would have to learn).
It's easy to edit what's alreadyd in the JSON files, it's when you wanna add MORE stuff. Like echomail, file areas, more than 1 message area. there is, by default a 'example' message area, and no file area example, nor is there a example of a Network setup..atleast not in my config file.... Regards, KrUpTiOn
Yep I get what you're saying the point I'm trying to make is that not everyone may be comfortable nor have much experience in editing a
text file and so assuming they are lazy because they don't want to touch it without the assistance of a config tool seems a little misguided to me.
Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that people who are installing a BBS are uncomfortable editing text. It's not like you have to use VI or something, you could use microsoft word and save it as a text file - or
as suggested use a json editor to make it even easier.
Yes, I agree, as I said feedback and constructive criticism is good. When I read stuff like enigma is incomplete or not ready or whatever because
it doesn't have a configuration editor, I don't think that's fair. It would be better to say, I'm not ready for enigma because I am uncomfortable editing text files. Or just simply enigma and I don't fit.
Yes, I agree, as I said feedback and constructive criticism is go
I read stuff like enigma is incomplete or not ready or whatever b
it doesn't have a configuration editor, I don't think that's fair would be better to say, I'm not ready for enigma because I am uncomfortable editing text files. Or just simply enigma and I don
I agree
Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that people who are installing a BBS are uncomfortable editing text. It's not like you have to use VI or something, you could use microsoft word and save it as a text file - or
as suggested use a json editor to make it even easier.
I guess it's really just wording, and what's important is the intent or attitude which is near impossible to gauge with written messages, and
easy to read stuff in that isn't there.
On 11/18/18, apam said the following...
Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that people who are instal
BBS are uncomfortable editing text. It's not like you have to use something, you could use microsoft word and save it as a text fil
as suggested use a json editor to make it even easier.
Honestly, I do. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but
the audience matters. Most BBS folks are hobbyists, and there's
nothing wrong with that at all, but most are not intensely technical people.
There is however, documentation with examples you could read...
On 11/18/18, apam pondered and said...
Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that people who are
installing a BBS are uncomfortable editing text. It's not like you
have to use VI or something, you could use microsoft word and save
it as a text file - or as suggested use a json editor to make it
even easier.
Depends on what the person is like I guess, but yeah I hear what you're saying :)
Re: Re: fsxNet Node Request
By: NuSkooler to KrUpTiOn on Sun Nov 18 2018 11:39 am
There is however, documentation with examples you could read...
Don't take this the wrong way, not very good examples. Hell, I cut
and pasted the example into the config file and it didn't work.
never said it was. I said "It's highly configurable, but not for the novice". Actually, I sent YOU my configs, and you told me the issues
I had and how to fix it. After that, I kinda stopped messing with it because I saw a pattern. I add something I think I understand, it end
up not working, I ask you for help, then you tell me how to fix it.
It's a little too much for ME...
Re: Re: Config Expectations
By: Avon to apam on Mon Nov 19 2018 01:46 pm
On 11/18/18, apam pondered and said...
Perhaps, but I find it hard to believe that people who are
installing a BBS are uncomfortable editing text. It's not like y
have to use VI or something, you could use microsoft word and sa
it as a text file - or as suggested use a json editor to make it
even easier.
Depends on what the person is like I guess, but yeah I hear what saying :)
My point.. same as you said. Not everybody is a programmer, not
everybody wants to become one in order to set up a BBS... What one
calls 'lazy', another calls 'easy to configure'. To each his own I
guess...
On 11-19-18 14:51, apam wrote to KrUpTiOn <=-
So, the examples are not very good, how about the documentation part?
The point of examples is to illustrate what the documents are saying,
not to be copy and pasted. Perhaps the documentation could be improved?
Perhaps there could be a small primer on JSON and what is actually
meant when using the term section / subsection etc?
I do think people having an aversion to modifying a json file, reading documentation etc because it's too hard might be selling themselves
short.
So, the examples are not very good, how about the documentation part? The point of examples is to illustrate what the documents are saying, not to be copy and pasted. Perhaps the documentation could be improved?
Perhaps there could be a small primer on JSON and what is actually meant when using the term section / subsection etc?
On Sunday, November 18th apam was heard saying...
So, the examples are not very good, how about the documentation p point of examples is to illustrate what the documents are saying,
be copy and pasted. Perhaps the documentation could be improved? Perhaps there could be a small primer on JSON and what is actuall
when using the term section / subsection etc?
There has been a TON of work going into the docs. Unfortunantely
GitHub won't allow a branch other than 'master' for pulling into the
main (fancier) doc site
@ https://nuskooler.github.io/enigma-bbs/ :(
RE: HJSON/JSON: I just created this page: https://github.com/NuSkooler/enigma-bbs/blob/0.0.9-alpha/docs/configur ation/hjs on.md
There has been a TON of work going into the docs. Unfortunantely GitHub won't allow a branch other than 'master' for pulling into the main (fancier) doc site @ https://nuskooler.github.io/enigma-bbs/ :(
Hey.. sorry if it sounded like I was having a go at your documentation (I wasn't), I think it's pretty awesome. Definitely better than what I have.
You sir, rock... I doff my cap to your doco skills :)
So, the examples are not very good, how about the documentation part? The point of examples is to illustrate what the documents are saying, not to be copy and pasted. Perhaps the documentation could be improved?
Perhaps there could be a small primer on JSON and what is actually meant when using the term section / subsection etc?
Re: Re: Config Expectations
By: Avon to apam on Mon Nov 19 2018 01:46 pm
I never said using a configuration editor is lazy. I said expecting one
to be created because a person too doesn't want to learn the current in place system is lazy.
Perhaps I was too harsh. Perhaps JSON is a too hard basket item for some people. I think though if one really wants to learn it they could. But as you say, not everyone wants to learn how to use something before using
it.
[...] a GREAT example is Linux. Linux is one of the first OSes.
When did IT become popular?
Re: Re: Config Expectations
By: apam to KrUpTiOn on Mon Nov 19 2018 03:03 pm
Re: Re: Config Expectations
By: Avon to apam on Mon Nov 19 2018 01:46 pm
I never said using a configuration editor is lazy. I said expecti
to be created because a person too doesn't want to learn the curr place system is lazy.
I don't think that's lazy at all. Why not expect or want something to
make setting up a product (or device) easy?
Just a quibble, but Linux is actually relatively young. Granted, it was more or less a reimplementation of Unix, which is much older, but Linux itself only dates to the early 1990s.
If enigma cost $300 like wildcat I might agree with you. There is a difference between expectation and wanting too. Enigma, magicka, mystic, synchronet are all developed for free, in the authors spare time - most have a real job, come home and code on their bbs software for fun.
Re: Re: Config ExpectationsIf enigma cost $300 like wildcat I might agree with you. There is a difference between expectation and wanting too. Enigma, magicka, mystic, synchronet are all developed for free, in the authors spare time - most have a real job, come home and code on their bbs software for fun.
A configuration editor isn't a trivial piece of software, and I think the effort expended in making one is less than the effort in learning the current in place system.
Well I think I've said all I have to say on this anyway, we might just have to agree to disagree :)
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 45:04:18 |
| Calls: | 6,648 |
| Files: | 12,197 |
| Messages: | 5,329,767 |