MSGID: 2:221/360 5cf60b4c   
   REPLY: 2:221/1.58@fidonet d910681d   
   PID: JamNNTPd/OS2 1.3 20190208   
   TID: GE/2 1.2   
   CHRS: UTF-8 2   
   TZUTC: 0300   
   Hi! August,   
      
   On 06/04/2019 01:40 AM, you wrote:   
      
   > experimented with the share attached to one of the WinXX pcs and made it   
   > avaiable for access from the Ubuntu pc.  Worked great.   
      
   Kewl.  I did a lot of early work with a coaxial LAN between just two   
   Win95/Win98 PCs, maybe even WFWG3.11.   
      
   > Martin and I concluded that Sempoint's JAM support is broken.  Are you   
   > absolutely sure your test message bases are JAM?  ..or did you just try   
   > MSG for Sempoint testing?   
      
   I'm still thinking it's SemPoint's 16-bitness in your modern Windows OSs,   
   putting the use of any Windows compatibility or visualization aside.  There   
   was one .msg netmail area used along with a dozen-to-fifteen JAM areas (one of   
   which might have been netmail, as well).   
      
   For simplicity, I went just for the areas SemPoint *already* knew the names of   
   for the JAM files.  Newly-created FMail areas and areas with long-ish Linux   
   names were ignored.  I stated that kind of wrongly, given your later   
   thoughts.  All of the areas were created and maintained by FMail, with some   
   using the same names as known to my Windows PCs.   
      
   My test post was from a JAM base for the FIDOTEST echo.  It didn't succeed   
   because I didn't put in enough time to sort out the weirdness with pathnames   
   in the SemPoint config for semaphore files, so that my Linux script on the   
   host could export it.   
      
   > I'm just wondering why JAM messagebases are cooperating for you, but not   
   > for Martin and me.   
      
   Modern OSs.  I used to even have problems with my Win98SE vBox. SemPoint was   
   the only program able to send netmail.  In the vBox, GoldEd used to always   
   screw up destination addresses... always.   
      
   > Also, one of Martin's concerns was that it looks like Sempoint is adding   
   > "garbage characters" near the Origin line.  You do not notice that in your   
   > set up?   
      
   Nope.   
      
   > But.. if you are using Fmail, that might explain many differences. You're   
   > the only one who reports using Fmail.  Maybe *that's* the difference?   
      
   Don't even think about it.  It's no good if you intend to run a NNTP server   
   based off of it; it renumbers messages in JAM areas during maint.  Besides   
   which, it doesn't know about JAM netmail areas yet.  And, it insists on   
   extensively using a Hudson base.   
      
   If you were on good speaking terms with FastEcho, then stick with it. Or, if   
   you're into sado-masochism then HPT.  Did I say once that CM was the easiest?    
   It's /known to work/ in XP...  :)   
      
   Cheers,   
   Paul.   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0   
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 15/2 19/10 154/10 203/0 221/0 1 6 360 226/17 229/354   
   SEEN-BY: 229/426 1014 240/5832 249/206 317 400 280/464 5003 292/854   
   SEEN-BY: 310/31 317/3 322/757 342/200 393/68 396/45 423/120 712/848   
   SEEN-BY: 770/1 2452/250   
   PATH: 221/360 1 280/464 229/426