Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm in the process of installing JNOS 111f for Linux and have run into a
problem. When a user sends a message to another local user, the system responds with a "Msg queued" message, but the message is never delivered. If I log in as Sysop, I can't see any messages. If I look in the /spool/mqueue I can see all the messages sitting there. Anyone have any suggestions on where to start? Thanks, Jeff N0WJP |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"charlesb" wrote
Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"charlesb" wrote
Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gene Storey" wrote in message news:5Xwkb.1932$5c2.310@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. Not really. The guy wanted to know how to get the JNOS software to behave and I gave an honest answer as to how I would solve the problem. - I would round-file the JNOS software, and go from there. I used to test and review packet software, and found JNOS to be the very lousiest excuse for packet radio software I had ever seen. Despite that, I did manage to get it working, at least good enough so that I could test its functionality for a fair review, so I am familiar with the unnecessary head-aches and poor on-the-air performance this guy is putting up with. I gave the guy a little historical info about the software he was using, and pointed the way to more modern software that will do a better job with a lot less trouble. I was working on the assumption that the guy was not a masochist, but just wanted a reliable packet radio BBS that would work without constant massaging and tinkering, or embarassing malfunctions that lose people's messages. I suppose that you are free to run me down for trying to help the guy out, but notice that I won't say a single word about you being an obvious "protocol warrior", still stuck back in the 1980's. Charles Brabhan, N5PVL |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Gene Storey" wrote in message news:5Xwkb.1932$5c2.310@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. Not really. The guy wanted to know how to get the JNOS software to behave and I gave an honest answer as to how I would solve the problem. - I would round-file the JNOS software, and go from there. I used to test and review packet software, and found JNOS to be the very lousiest excuse for packet radio software I had ever seen. Despite that, I did manage to get it working, at least good enough so that I could test its functionality for a fair review, so I am familiar with the unnecessary head-aches and poor on-the-air performance this guy is putting up with. I gave the guy a little historical info about the software he was using, and pointed the way to more modern software that will do a better job with a lot less trouble. I was working on the assumption that the guy was not a masochist, but just wanted a reliable packet radio BBS that would work without constant massaging and tinkering, or embarassing malfunctions that lose people's messages. I suppose that you are free to run me down for trying to help the guy out, but notice that I won't say a single word about you being an obvious "protocol warrior", still stuck back in the 1980's. Charles Brabhan, N5PVL |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the suggestions, Charles, but FBB is the whole reason I'm looking
at JNOS. I ran it for several years and found it to be very unreliable and unable to integrate with gateway software. I used FBB to run the local packet BBS here in Omaha and to forward on VHF, UHF, HF, and the internet. FBB is great for talking to other FBB systems, but not too good at talking to anything else. And yes, I plan to gateway this system through the internet. I'll hold on to my ham license, though. I need it for my 10-15 hours I spend each week on HF either on 7.261 or working cw on the low end of 40. And speaking of obsolete systems, where would I buy a copy of DOS if I wanted to run FBB? I haven't seen one for almost 10 years. 73, Jeff N0WJP "charlesb" wrote in message ... "Gene Storey" wrote in message news:5Xwkb.1932$5c2.310@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. Not really. The guy wanted to know how to get the JNOS software to behave and I gave an honest answer as to how I would solve the problem. - I would round-file the JNOS software, and go from there. I used to test and review packet software, and found JNOS to be the very lousiest excuse for packet radio software I had ever seen. Despite that, I did manage to get it working, at least good enough so that I could test its functionality for a fair review, so I am familiar with the unnecessary head-aches and poor on-the-air performance this guy is putting up with. I gave the guy a little historical info about the software he was using, and pointed the way to more modern software that will do a better job with a lot less trouble. I was working on the assumption that the guy was not a masochist, but just wanted a reliable packet radio BBS that would work without constant massaging and tinkering, or embarassing malfunctions that lose people's messages. I suppose that you are free to run me down for trying to help the guy out, but notice that I won't say a single word about you being an obvious "protocol warrior", still stuck back in the 1980's. Charles Brabhan, N5PVL |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the suggestions, Charles, but FBB is the whole reason I'm looking
at JNOS. I ran it for several years and found it to be very unreliable and unable to integrate with gateway software. I used FBB to run the local packet BBS here in Omaha and to forward on VHF, UHF, HF, and the internet. FBB is great for talking to other FBB systems, but not too good at talking to anything else. And yes, I plan to gateway this system through the internet. I'll hold on to my ham license, though. I need it for my 10-15 hours I spend each week on HF either on 7.261 or working cw on the low end of 40. And speaking of obsolete systems, where would I buy a copy of DOS if I wanted to run FBB? I haven't seen one for almost 10 years. 73, Jeff N0WJP "charlesb" wrote in message ... "Gene Storey" wrote in message news:5Xwkb.1932$5c2.310@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote Hope this helps! It doesn't. Your argument is much that of a Mac user when asked a PC question. They say buy a Mac, and then list a bunch of generalities while bashing the PC. Not really. The guy wanted to know how to get the JNOS software to behave and I gave an honest answer as to how I would solve the problem. - I would round-file the JNOS software, and go from there. I used to test and review packet software, and found JNOS to be the very lousiest excuse for packet radio software I had ever seen. Despite that, I did manage to get it working, at least good enough so that I could test its functionality for a fair review, so I am familiar with the unnecessary head-aches and poor on-the-air performance this guy is putting up with. I gave the guy a little historical info about the software he was using, and pointed the way to more modern software that will do a better job with a lot less trouble. I was working on the assumption that the guy was not a masochist, but just wanted a reliable packet radio BBS that would work without constant massaging and tinkering, or embarassing malfunctions that lose people's messages. I suppose that you are free to run me down for trying to help the guy out, but notice that I won't say a single word about you being an obvious "protocol warrior", still stuck back in the 1980's. Charles Brabhan, N5PVL |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jeff Camp" wrote in message news:5OJkb.21408$iq3.18773@okepread01... Thanks for the suggestions, Charles, but FBB is the whole reason I'm looking at JNOS. I ran it for several years and found it to be very unreliable and unable to integrate with gateway software. I used FBB to run the local packet BBS here in Omaha and to forward on VHF, UHF, HF, and the internet. FBB is great for talking to other FBB systems, but not too good at talking to anything else. Well, to tell the truth, Jeff, you are the second person I've ever heard talk about FBB BBS software being "unreliable". The other complainer was a LandLine Lid, too, so I'll assume it's the non-ham stuff that you are having trouble with. You can imagine how broke up I must be, over you experiencing difficulties while trying to screw up. And yes, I plan to gateway this system through the internet. I'll hold on to my ham license, though. I need it for my 10-15 hours I spend each week on HF either on 7.261 or working cw on the low end of 40. Don't count on your messages being delivered to or by the genuine amateur radio stations in the BBS forwarding net. Gateway stations have caused so much damage to the fowarding network that many BBS forwarders are now refusing to handle traffic either coming from or going into any LandLine Lid system. Several of the more destructive LansdLine Lid stations have been isolated this way, to reduce the amount of damage that they can do. There are now large sections of the country where non-ham stuff is not allowed to participate in the Ham Radio network at all. Your messages will not be delivered there. LandLine Lid stations there can chat with each other on the Internet, as usual, but are not allowed to disrupt the activities of genuine amateur radio packet network. You will probably be "forwarding" ( internet chatting) with some of these lonely, out of place LandLine Lid stations, keeping a miserable trickle of messages going for them. Remember that the packet radio HF forwarding network is an association of amateur radio operators who work to implement HF digital links. Your non-ham links are not welcome amongst these hams who are trying to use radio, and your operation within that group with your non-ham links will- to the extent that it is tolerated - cause disruption within the network, making it harder for hams to use radio as intended for this purpose. - But you already know all that, Jeff, and don't care. That's the kind of "ham" that you are, aren't you? You know, this kind of destructive, disruptive LandLine Lid "protocol war" behavior was bad enough back in the 1980's... Back then, it decimated the existing HF forwarding network and disrupted packet communications across the USA, and it was all chalked up to "protocol wars", as if that was any justification for deliberately disrupting amateur radio communications. These days, with the ARRL affiliated with Homeland Security, your disruptive, anti-ham activities may have a little bit more serious consequences that they might have had ten years ago. I sincerely hope that it does. You are an insect, Jeff, that really deserves to be squashed. I consider anybody who deliberately denigrates and undercuts the ham digital network as you intend to do, during this time of war against terrorism to be beneath contempt. What used to be despicable enough as "protocol warrior" behavior back in the 1980's can now end up costing people's lives and property, disrupting our ability to as hams to provide emergency communications in the event of a terrorist attack or disaster. There is literally no excuse for the disruptive, destructive activity you propose. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jeff Camp" wrote in message news:5OJkb.21408$iq3.18773@okepread01... Thanks for the suggestions, Charles, but FBB is the whole reason I'm looking at JNOS. I ran it for several years and found it to be very unreliable and unable to integrate with gateway software. I used FBB to run the local packet BBS here in Omaha and to forward on VHF, UHF, HF, and the internet. FBB is great for talking to other FBB systems, but not too good at talking to anything else. Well, to tell the truth, Jeff, you are the second person I've ever heard talk about FBB BBS software being "unreliable". The other complainer was a LandLine Lid, too, so I'll assume it's the non-ham stuff that you are having trouble with. You can imagine how broke up I must be, over you experiencing difficulties while trying to screw up. And yes, I plan to gateway this system through the internet. I'll hold on to my ham license, though. I need it for my 10-15 hours I spend each week on HF either on 7.261 or working cw on the low end of 40. Don't count on your messages being delivered to or by the genuine amateur radio stations in the BBS forwarding net. Gateway stations have caused so much damage to the fowarding network that many BBS forwarders are now refusing to handle traffic either coming from or going into any LandLine Lid system. Several of the more destructive LansdLine Lid stations have been isolated this way, to reduce the amount of damage that they can do. There are now large sections of the country where non-ham stuff is not allowed to participate in the Ham Radio network at all. Your messages will not be delivered there. LandLine Lid stations there can chat with each other on the Internet, as usual, but are not allowed to disrupt the activities of genuine amateur radio packet network. You will probably be "forwarding" ( internet chatting) with some of these lonely, out of place LandLine Lid stations, keeping a miserable trickle of messages going for them. Remember that the packet radio HF forwarding network is an association of amateur radio operators who work to implement HF digital links. Your non-ham links are not welcome amongst these hams who are trying to use radio, and your operation within that group with your non-ham links will- to the extent that it is tolerated - cause disruption within the network, making it harder for hams to use radio as intended for this purpose. - But you already know all that, Jeff, and don't care. That's the kind of "ham" that you are, aren't you? You know, this kind of destructive, disruptive LandLine Lid "protocol war" behavior was bad enough back in the 1980's... Back then, it decimated the existing HF forwarding network and disrupted packet communications across the USA, and it was all chalked up to "protocol wars", as if that was any justification for deliberately disrupting amateur radio communications. These days, with the ARRL affiliated with Homeland Security, your disruptive, anti-ham activities may have a little bit more serious consequences that they might have had ten years ago. I sincerely hope that it does. You are an insect, Jeff, that really deserves to be squashed. I consider anybody who deliberately denigrates and undercuts the ham digital network as you intend to do, during this time of war against terrorism to be beneath contempt. What used to be despicable enough as "protocol warrior" behavior back in the 1980's can now end up costing people's lives and property, disrupting our ability to as hams to provide emergency communications in the event of a terrorist attack or disaster. There is literally no excuse for the disruptive, destructive activity you propose. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jeff Camp" wrote in message news:5OJkb.21408$iq3.18773@okepread01... And speaking of obsolete systems, where would I buy a copy of DOS if I wanted to run FBB? I haven't seen one for almost 10 years. I didn't say it was newer, I said it was more reliable and did not require so much tinkering. You can get copiies of DOS all over the place. Try an interenet search, or get somebody to show you how to do one. Charles Brabham, N5PVL |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Inverted ground plane antenna: compared with normal GP and low dipole. | Antenna | |||
money!!! | Antenna | |||
money!!! | Antenna |