+DarkLord Posted October 26, 2021 Share Posted October 26, 2021 On 10/20/2021 at 10:03 AM, Mr Robot said: I'd love for there to still be BBS's with the same small group of like minded people sharing info and helping each other but I find I don't have much in common with the people leaving messages on the BBS's I've visited recently, it's hard to contribute something new and nothing you find there is exclusive; I've usually read it all in multiple places already. Huh. That "same small group of like minded people sharing info" is exactly why BBS'ing continues to be a huge draw for me. I've actually posted messages to BBS's and got faster/more accurate replies than I did from some forums... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Robot Posted October 26, 2021 Share Posted October 26, 2021 It's almost like different people have different experiences when doing the same thing! 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DarkLord Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 Could that be a subset (sub-clause?) of the definition of "insanity"? You know, doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_The Doctor__ Posted October 27, 2021 Share Posted October 27, 2021 But who said being a sysop was sane? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DarkLord Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 20 hours ago, _The Doctor__ said: But who said being a sysop was sane? Truth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amis Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 15 hours ago, DarkLord said: Truth! Sure. Who else would give away hours/years of coding, creativity, active participation, work product, and collaboration with others as a free service? Where the user is not the product? And the criticisms which comes with it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Both Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 ... must be a Sub ... Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DarkLord Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 6 hours ago, Amis said: Sure. Who else would give away hours/years of coding, creativity, active participation, work product, and collaboration with others as a free service? Where the user is not the product? And the criticisms which come with it.. I just can't imagine... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnPolka Posted October 29, 2021 Share Posted October 29, 2021 9 hours ago, Amis said: Sure. Who else would give away hours/years of coding, creativity, active participation, work product, and collaboration with others as a free service? Where the user is not the product? And the criticisms which come with it.. Yes, it's a thankless job. But running a BBS is still a labor of love. -JP 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted October 30, 2021 Share Posted October 30, 2021 @tschak909 What WAITCALL.CMD did you use w/ Pro BBS? I have tried many. Please send it to me. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted October 30, 2021 Author Share Posted October 30, 2021 31 minutes ago, Kyle22 said: @tschak909 What WAITCALL.CMD did you use w/ Pro BBS? I have tried many. Please send it to me. Thanks. The standard one that comes with both 2.0 and 5.0. The problem with waitcall I suspect, is that it is improperly opening and closing concurrent mode. This works okay with PBI based storage solutions, but storage over SIO fails to work correctly because of incorrectly closing concurrent mode before attempting any serial I/O. -Thom 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_The Doctor__ Posted October 31, 2021 Share Posted October 31, 2021 The 'standard' waitcall should be 850 and smartmodem (hayes)... the answer appears to be you didn't do it, you used whatever someone else had set up and it worked for the video... so that leaves everyone else to guess which one happened to worked. perhaps somebody will share their fujinet config, startup, batch and such stuff as well as what they used for the waitcall... saving others the frustration and duplication of effort. of course none of that will matter if wifi devices don't forward port correctly or do not provide a true dmz when requested. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 1, 2021 Author Share Posted November 1, 2021 (edited) 13 minutes ago, _The Doctor__ said: The 'standard' waitcall should be 850 and smartmodem (hayes)... the answer appears to be you didn't do it, you used whatever someone else had set up and it worked for the video... so that leaves everyone else to guess which one happened to worked. perhaps somebody will share their fujinet config, startup, batch and such stuff as well as what they used for the waitcall... saving others the frustration and duplication of effort. of course none of that will matter if wifi devices don't forward port correctly or do not provide a true dmz when requested. I'm starting to get a bit annoyed. The version of waitcall that wound up on later versions of 5.0 does not properly handle concurrent mode. Of course, we never know, because none of the genetic defectives behind BBS Express! ever bothered to release source code because "Muh Moneys!" And we get stupid problems like this. -Thom Edited November 1, 2021 by tschak909 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted November 2, 2021 Share Posted November 2, 2021 @tschak909 Can you post the waitcall that works for you? Much appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 3, 2021 Author Share Posted November 3, 2021 (edited) You aren't listening to me. Both of you. It's the standard waitcall. Are you running your storage from PBI (a la SIDE2/3)? Or are you trying to use storage over SIO (a la FujiNet?) If you're doing the latter, it won't work for you. Nobody bothered to ever test it seems. I'd love to just paste the copies of 2.0 and 5.0 that I have, but the certain thalidomide child in charge of BBS Express's copyrights would have an absolute fecal fit. -Thom waitcalls.zip Edited November 3, 2021 by tschak909 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 It's 96.235.21.69 port 10001 if anyone wants to try it w/ the new waitcall. My router won't let me get it from this laptop for some reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 3, 2021 Author Share Posted November 3, 2021 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 I saw your attempt. That's similar to what I was getting w/ the other WAITCALLs. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_The Doctor__ Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 it always looks like translation issues. both the fujinet and the terminal need to use raw mode... not telnet... is the fujinet raw? is syncterm making a raw connection? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 3, 2021 Author Share Posted November 3, 2021 @kyle22 try setting interface type to MIO/BB. -Thom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_The Doctor__ Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 setting the interface type to MIO BB will make the sio port stop switching between concurrent/block mode... if that fixes it, there's an issue with 850 emulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 @_The Doctor__ Any ideas? @tschak909 I used WAITCALL.CMD from the .zip you posted. It that the correct one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 3, 2021 Author Share Posted November 3, 2021 1 minute ago, Kyle22 said: @_The Doctor__ Any ideas? @tschak909 I used WAITCALL.CMD from the .zip you posted. It that the correct one? yes. -Thom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle22 Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 (edited) If you set interface type using the http://fujinet method, then my router won't let me do that upstairs. I *can* do it downstairs for some reason. I am just getting used to the eeros. @_The Doctor__ Edited November 3, 2021 by Kyle22 Tag Doc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tschak909 Posted November 3, 2021 Author Share Posted November 3, 2021 Again, as I said before, there's an issue with the 850 mode in WAITCALL. Nobody ever runs their BBS Express Pro storage over SIO, so nobody ever caught it. But, if we want to spend the next 6 months going back and forth before you guys figure that out, then, ok. -Thom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.