| |
I0OJJ > DPBOX 02.04.24 11:30l 59 Lines 2256 Bytes #999 (7) @ WW
BID : 24YI0OJJ_002
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re^2: DPBOX & others
Path: IW8PGT<LU4ECL<I0OJJ
Sent: 240402/1007z @:I0OJJ.ITA.EU [Rome] obcm1.08-6-g5b69 LT:007
From: I0OJJ @ I0OJJ.ITA.EU (Gustavo)
To: DPBOX @ WW
X-Info: Sent with login password
>Hi Gustavo.
>
>I0OJJ:
>>
>> Ah ah, look at english language text used by WFBB ante year 2000.
>> That file is NOT the *original* one edited for (x)FBB by LA6CU
>> and amended/restyled by I0OJJ which you can find inside the recent
>> LinFBB releases.
>
>BPQMail don't use any of FBB's language-text files, sorry
>can't understand that point about "bpq bbs get source from winfbb",
>its not true.
Sergej, you cannot understand because you refer to a graphic
console! You MUST refer to the character console of linbpq
and compare it with a character console to an OLD windoze FBB!!!
>On my imho, its was bad thing where hams dropped radio and later off axUDP
>nodes-linking and replaced it all by "dumb" telnet-fwd, even if you recall,
>near year 2000 most of normal packet ops called them "LLL" (land-line-lids).
For what concerns myself I have full pockets regarding the radio.
After I built the first radio in A.M. at the age of 16 and then
used in a thousand ways, voice, CW, packet, EME, satellites, etc.
I think that internet is a blessing of the Lord!
>And just now with fresh (Lin)BPQ(32) development we back live to original
>nodes links system based on netrom or imp3. Although it is now based mostly
>on axudp, it works fine if proper setup.
>Its our ham thing, why we should not use it or lost it in regards to telnet?!
>Even some type of "auto-routing" forward feature of German's BBS s/w use
>nodes linking to find a route!
>
>
>> By the way, the method adopted on BPQ and regarding the two different
>> telnet approach (see TCPPORT and FBBPORT) are a true disaster!
>> Why not simply use the (one) telnet feature of other STANDARD PBBS?
>
>Because developer was not considered to add telnet-fwd at all,
>originally telnet server ("tcpport") was done just for sysop's terminal
>remote access to node. Later by few asks he added fbb-telnet mode too.
But what fbb-telnet? The very old one :(
>Your founded problem of non-compatible telnet fwd from (or to?) BPQmail
>should checked again. Of course its good to fix it.
I hope that failure will be fixed, but since now no news
join to me about it... however I am awaiting :)
73, gustavo i0ojj
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
