Hi DM. Is there a chance in the future that you might consider combining both into 1 configuration file? Most BBSes have that feature built-in.
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 02:50 pm
I don't think so.
digital man
Synchronet "Real Fact" #50:
JAM and Squish were considered before developing Synchronet Message Base format.
Norco, CA WX: 67.0°F, 54.0% humidity, 1 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 02:50 pm
I don't think so.
May I ask the reason why?
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 03:25 pm
Because echocfg is to sbbsecho, what scfg is to sbbs.
It's somewhat important that the version of echocfg you run matches the version of SBBSecho you run, while it's irrelevant to sbbs what version of echocfg you run and (pretty) irrelevant to sbbsecho was version of scfg you run.
digital man
Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #44:
JS = JavaScript
Norco, CA WX: 63.9°F, 62.0% humidity, 10 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 03:25 pm
Because echocfg is to sbbsecho, what scfg is to sbbs.
It's somewhat important that the version of echocfg you run matches the version of SBBSecho you run, while it's irrelevant to sbbs what version of echocfg you run and (pretty) irrelevant to sbbsecho was version of scfg you run.
Then why do most authors combine the two into 1 cfg file?
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 06:38 pm
Simple answer: they don't.
I think you're assumption about the integration of "most" BBS and FTN EchoMail programs is incorrect. Perhaps *some* BBS packages have integrated EchoMail functionality (Mystic comes to mind), but *most* do not.
But that's really irrelevant anyway, because we're talking about the design of Synchronet, where the BBS software is distinctly separate from the echomail program, SBBSecho. You don't *have* to use SBBSecho for FidoNet mail import/export in Synchronet; you could, at least in theory, and the past in practice, use a different EchoMail program (e.g. InterMail). If you were to use a different EchoMail program, then the integration fo SBBSecho's configuration in the BBS's integration would make no sense and just be a point of extra confusion for sysops.
digital man
This Is Spinal Tap quote #23:
David St. Hubbins: I envy us.
Norco, CA WX: 61.3°F, 67.0% humidity, 8 mph NE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
Then why do most authors combine the two into 1 cfg file?
Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Sat Apr 04 2020 06:38 pm
Simple answer: they don't.
I think you're assumption about the integration of "most" BBS and FTN EchoMail programs is incorrect. Perhaps *some* BBS packages have integrated EchoMail functionality (Mystic comes to mind), but *most* do not.
But that's really irrelevant anyway, because we're talking about the design of Synchronet, where the BBS software is distinctly separate from the echomail program, SBBSecho. You don't *have* to use SBBSecho for FidoNet mail import/export in Synchronet; you could, at least in theory, and the past in practice, use a different EchoMail program (e.g. InterMail). If you were to use a different EchoMail program, then the integration fo SBBSecho's configuration in the BBS's integration would make no sense and just be a point of extra confusion for sysops.
Are you making Synchronet a flexible package to work with?
Meaning to allow
third party interconnection with the system, that is.
allowin practice, use a different EchoMail program (e.g. InterMail). If you were
to use a different EchoMail program, then the integration fo SBBSecho's
configuration in the BBS's integration would make no sense and just be a
point of extra confusion for sysops.
Are you making Synchronet a flexible package to work with? Meaning to
third party interconnection with the system, that is.
Then why do most authors combine the two into 1 cfg file?
Like who?
Oh, you know, those other guys. The ones who combine them into one cfg file.
Are you making Synchronet a flexible package to work with? Meaning to allow third party interconnection with the system, that is.
On 04-04-20 18:51, Digital Man wrote to The Millionaire <=-
I think you're assumption about the integration of "most" BBS and FTN EchoMail programs is incorrect. Perhaps *some* BBS packages have integrated EchoMail functionality (Mystic comes to mind), but *most* do not.
On 04-04-20 22:49, echicken wrote to The Millionaire <=-
There are many integrations between Synchronet and third-party systems
of various kinds, and if a new one is needed, we have most of the tools
we need to make it happen.
I think you're assumption about the integration of "most" BBS and
FTN EchoMail programs is incorrect. Perhaps *some* BBS packages have
integrated EchoMail functionality (Mystic comes to mind), but *most*
do not.
Mystic is the only one I've used that has integrated BBS/tosser configuration. Like many sysops, I come from the days when you used a BBS, mailer and tosser from 3 separate authors. :)
FidoNet EchoMail and NetMail
In my case, I use SBSS and SBBSEcho, but I use BinkD as my mailer instead of the supplied BinkIT.
Tony Langdon wrote to Digital Man <=-
Mystic is the only one I've used that has integrated BBS/tosser configuration. Like many sysops, I come from the days when you used a
BBS, mailer and tosser from 3 separate authors. :)
On 04-06-20 10:36, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Re: Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: Tony Langdon to echicken on Sun Apr 05 2020 03:22 pm
In my case, I use SBSS and SBBSEcho, but I use BinkD as my mailer instead of the supplied BinkIT.
I used to use a 3rd-party mailer (Radius), but I switched to BinkIt because I like that it's included with Synchronet. Also BinkIt is
written in JavaScript, so if I ever moved my BBS from Windows to Linux, BinkIt would still run.
I'm running on Linux, highly unlikely to switch to Windows. I have a strong preference for Linux for server tasks, Windows tends to be used for the desktop/client side of things.
On 04-06-20 10:35, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah, I think it makes sense for those to be separate pieces. A sysop also might not choose to join a FTN network, so it doesn't really make sense to have the FTN settings in the main BBS configuration program.
Then again, Synchronet has QWK settings in SCFG when a sysop might not necessarily join a QWK network either..
And checking again, SCFG does have some FidoNet settings in SCFG under Networks
On 04-06-20 08:03, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Heck, I just left there - I was running Synchronet, Allfix, and Radius less than a year ago, it's fairly recently that Synchronet added integrated the mailer and file echo support.
On 04-07-20 13:22, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I can understand that. For BBSing though, I did a lot of BBSing
starting in the early 90s. That was before Linux got big, so all of my BBSing was pretty much in DOS. I ran my original BBS in DOS too, so I
guess I tend to feel like DOS & Windows is the natural place for
running a BBS. Many BBS doors were written for DOS, so a 32-bit
Windows environment these days is where everything just works. I know Synchronet for Linux can run DOS doors though. I've considered moving
my BBS to Linux at some point.
I don't have a 32 bit Windows machine these days, they're all 64 bit anyway. :)
On 04-08-20 12:17, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Re: Re: Echocfg + Scfg
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Wed Apr 08 2020 07:30 pm
I don't have a 32 bit Windows machine these days, they're all 64 bit anyway. :)
You can buy a 32-bit PC fairly cheap, or I imagine you could probably still find a copy of a 32-bit Windows to buy fairly cheap and set up a
VM if you wanted.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 88:40:31 |
| Calls: | 2,069 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 11,134 |
| Messages: | 946,759 |