On 09/28/2016 03:31 AM, mark lewis -> rick christian wrote:   
    ml> yeah, we had SIO with telnet and vmodem protocols before win95 came   
    ml> out... likely you just don't remember or didn't know about the vmodem   
    ml> protocol at that time :)   
      
   If it wasn't in DOS at the time.. I was pretty good at sticking my head in the   
   sand and ignoring it..   
      
   I only used wfwg for 2 reasons   
      
   1) My ICLID program forced it... there really was no good ICLID program for   
   DOS which would forward to a pager   
      
   2) LAN, I used 10Base2 longer than probably any one on the planet! :)   
      
   So I was dragged kicking and screaming to it.. but spent most of the time in a   
   DOS console.   
      
      
    ml> yep, that explains it :lol: i went from DOS/DESQview to OS/2 and never   
    ml> looked back at anything else for that system... yeah, i ran the various   
    ml> winwhatevers but not for mission critical stuff...   
      
   DOS -> wfwg -> 98 -> xp -> Linux   
      
   Linux was running along side things for a long time as I was used to it from   
   my VAX, VMS, and other main frame stuff, and we had a XENIX (yeah I know where   
   it came from! :( ) at work for stuff...   
      
   I was really more preoccupied with uucp and FTN stuff to look too far outside   
   it..   
      
   And I never had OS2 capable hardware.   
      
    ml> it really doesn't matter since you can forward your WAN side port 23 to   
    ml> any other port internally so set your BBS up on 2023 for instance and   
    ml> forward port 23 to that... the BBS doesn't have to know that it isn't   
    ml> talking to port 23 all the way...   
      
   Yeah, it can... but I've run across a few places of wifi and VPN's that hork   
   up non standard ports...   
      
   I can VPN into my own server to eliminate things most times...   
      
      
    ml> sadly that's because developers code and don't always remember the   
    ml> individual steps or additional requirements...   
      
   That, and theres a lot of stuff that they don't notate... in ONE, and ONLY ONE   
   instance have I seen instructions that work... that is to compile Darkice on   
   Raspian, since I need MP3 support and Debians DFSG removes it! :( urrrrgghhh...   
      
   About the only other thing I've seen work as well is the VMWare Player   
   installer which if you let them catch up to the release of *Buntu & Kernel,   
   you just chmod +x the installer, sudo sh installit.sh and it compiles the   
   kernel stuff it needs...   
      
   If you get too bleeding edge with it.. prepare for the pain! :) ;)   
      
      
    ml> screw that shite :lol:   
      
   I was more rogue like that.. I learned my lesson the HARD WAY by screwing up   
   some stuff!  No more!   
      
   Nope... Read, read, read, compare notes... ok... read, read... put it in a   
   VM.. success?? OK... COPIOUS AND RUTHLESS NOTES via TEE and by hand....   
      
   That lead to my VM Guru'ness! :)   
      
    ml> agree there... for me, that goes for most anything, though... not just   
    ml> DEB...   
      
   When I can repeat my 99.9% success rate with DEBS and/or apt-get via regular   
   repos' or PPA's... then I will change my opinion of RPM... and it is unlikely   
   that will ever, EVER happen!   
      
   Same package of stuff for CentOS.. FAIL, FAIL, FAIL.. I think the first time I   
   did it on my own it took 2-3 hours over 2 days to find the various EXACT   
   versions of other RPM's it needed to get it to compile/install from that RPM   
      
   versus   
      
   sudo apt-get install mystuff   
      
   Setup up, and moved on in less than 30 minutes.   
      
   When its my own time it even still not going to devote that kind to that kind   
   of hunt... When its company time.. well then... I ain't paying for that kind   
   of nonsense.   
      
    ml> sometimes it is too much busy work, too...   
      
   It is/can be... but SAFETY is a key portion of my job.  Myself and my team   
   have become quite good at turning up VM's playing with them, getting what we   
   need to install setup and go...   
      
   I always take a base image for each ESR release that is the standard image for   
      
   Server   
   Desktop   
   LTSP Server   
   Thin clients   
      
   Outside my direct department they use nothing by LTSP thin setups... The   
   little cubites just point and clickey on things.. they can't really screw it   
   up, too much! :) ;)   
      
   When the distro doesn't include basic things like nslookup in the ISO's   
   something is wrong... We/I have some other personal things....   
      
   Like the pile of dead ones I have to try to:   
      
   purge systemd   
   install upstart   
   install lightdm or KDM to get an XDMCP capable DM...   
      
   All die! 16.04 just won't revert.. or well I should say they revert back to   
   upstart, but with out an XDMCP capable DM,... useless. so 16.04 is banned...   
   and Devuan well is fouled due to DFSG.. and it really is not got a lot of   
   steam to get things going.. last I looked it didn't have anything to even   
   install.. but the fact I would need to do huge amounts of compiling of   
   stuff... no thanks...I am not sure what my plan is yet for post 2019... but   
   things look bleak. systemd, mir/wayland... all solutions to problems which,   
   well don't exist. And BREAK in MAJOR WAYS things I do, daily, like XDMCP!   
      
    ml> i was thinking that DOXBOX was the virtual machine and you could use   
    ml> your own DOS on it...   
      
   DOSBox sort of takes it all on... there is some HOWTO's about putting DRDOS   
   etc in...the docu sucks for this, and it seems aimed more at a group, gamers,   
   which is another area I am not inline with, and alot of emphasis on putting   
   junky software into things. :) ;)   
      
   DOSemu needs installs of full DOSetc..   
      
    ml> i've never heard of TLB...   
      
   You probably had to be big into shareware and the various chipsets out   
   there..TLB took advantage of advanced features that alot of the other memory   
   managers didn't. Based on going the OS2 route I doubt there was a need for   
   some of the shenanigans of TLB etc.. Don't know, never looked at OS2 as more   
   than, oh great, another GUI thingy...   
      
   Since I've built all my own boxes since.. well a long time... I was into all   
   the various tricks that some MB's incorporated to get more RAM for DOS.   
      
   I also got HUGE PILES of disks each month with shareware on them, plus I was   
   connected to various FDN's to get stuff, and DL'd tons of stuff too.   
      
    ml> i am/was a frontdoor beta tester so i had access to additional   
    ml> capabilities that were not available to the mainstream users ;)   
      
   So??? I take it this never made it into a "release" version that us mere   
   mortals saw? Ie: V2.25SL or something???   
      
   If not I guess I won't bother playing with it...if it did, which one?   
      
   That way I grab the right one to play with... or stop if that feature never   
   made it to the public.   
      
    ml> not really... just a matter of creating a slightly older format of   
    ml> nodelist and moving the domain from the INA flag or the system name   
    ml> field to the phone field and prefixing it with 000- BUT only doing this   
      
   I figure I can use Python or PHP to do the conversions.. I deal with those   
   daily.   
      
    ml> the script that creates the distributed binkd.txt is written in perl...   
      
   Yeah.. never was into PERL...   
      
      
    ml> yeah, we've split "PVT" and "-Unpublished-" from each other... one does   
    ml> not require the other these days... this because some could not agree   
    ml> that the "phone number field" is really a "contact field" and allow IP   
    ml> numbers and/or domains to be listed there... frontdoor, if it had been   
    ml> able to remain in development would have helped to force that option and   
      
      
   Yeah I figured that that whole thing was a mess from the various iterations it   
   appears things went through.   
      
      
    rc>> That clue probably saved me from dropping the experiment when it   
    rc>> barfed on the node list...   
      
    ml> TBH, i really don't even need to be running FD any more... very rarely   
    ml> do i get any mailer connections over telnet... tobias (from fastecho)   
    ml> still polls me on telnet but he's using some winwhatever mailer instead   
      
   I have a couple of reasons for trying this...   
      
   1) Pet project   
   2) Nostalgia   
   3) Another idea for something, I don't want to blurt out just yet..   
      
   1 & 2 really more for my own fun... So I am amused by simple things! :) ;)   
      
   I honestly would be quite amused to just see FD run under Linux! I know its   
   not really natively running, but I can live with the DOSbox shim whereas I   
   can't the mono virus and its cousin WINE. BLECH! PWETTTW!   
      
   To be honest I really would have thought that this Fido stuff would have been   
   more ported to Linux to begin with since its more like "DOS" but with out some   
   of the hassles. Yes it might have few different hassles say X if you want GUI.   
   And binaries can be distributed if you just package up things in DEB, and you   
   don't have to give the source out... Yeah the whiner wieners will whine, but I   
   ignore them... I could care less about the source! 95% of the users could care   
   less. They are like me install it get things done, move on in life!   
      
    rc>> And honestly does EVERYTHING on the planet need an IP???? ;)   
      
    ml> that's my thing, too... it is no one's business how many machines i have   
    ml> on my network and you're surely not going to charge me for each one that   
    ml> uses the internet... we won't even mention that 640k is enough for   
    ml> anyone and the number of available IPs is no more or less shortsighted   
    ml> than IPv4 is/was... available IPv6 numbers will run out one day...   
      
   My gripe with IP6 is the total stupid, and STUPID interface!   
      
      
   HEX v. 127.0.0.1  so we need more.. come up with IPvX and just add more like   
   127.0.0.0.0.1 or something... or 0.0.0.127.0.0.1 . Then add in all the   
   nonsesne on how IPv6 can be shrunk for repeating stuff... OH PUHLEASE! That is   
   the kind of crap that happens when engineers are left unsupervised and some   
   one who doesn't understand it ratifies it via rubber stamp as a "standard."   
      
   Then I like all the schmucks who are just going to start running around   
   connecting any and everything to the net because it has v6 and they think it   
   makes them more secure v. a proper firewall.... and the railing against NAT..   
   Meh... I don't see the big deal.. I've yet to see a situation where being   
   directly on the internet behind a firewall versus NAT really made that big a   
   difference except when you want tons of apache servers running on port   
   80...Myabe I jusst have not found the right prickly hardware/software... but I   
   really don't want to be hosting httpd servers locally for my stuff that the   
   public is traversing into my network.. I'd rather they be out there in a DC   
   where there is no connection to my network in a way they could access things   
   they don't need... Backups yeah.. I can spin up some in an emergency... but   
   the routine stuff is in DC's elsewhere.   
      
   Much like being dragged into windumber, I will go kicking and screaming into   
   IPv6 only when forced... I just don't see the need... The world has not come   
   to an end.. servers come online all the time with IP4 without a big deal...   
      
    * Origin: news://news.wpusa.dynip.com | acct req'd to post (1:3634/12)