home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.

   SYNC_PROGRAMMING      Synchronet/Baja/XSDK Programming      49,116 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 48,778 of 49,116   
   Rob Swindell (on Windows 11) to Git commit to main/sbbs/master   
   src/sbbs3/sbbsecho.c sbbsecho.h   
   19 Jan 26 15:07:49   
   
   TZUTC: -0800   
   MSGID: 54210.syncprog@1:103/705 2dd4c307   
   PID: Synchronet 3.21b-Linux master/177a369d2 Jan 04 2026 GCC 12.2.0   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.34-Linux master/f6746e937 Jan 19 2026 GCC 12.2.0   
   BBSID: VERT   
   CHRS: ASCII 1   
   FORMAT: flowed   
   https://gitlab.synchro.net/main/sbbs/-/commit/eebfd74ddc924e1e98c2b159   
   Modified Files:   
   	src/sbbs3/sbbsecho.c sbbsecho.h   
   Log Message:   
   Unpack bundles starting from 6 weekdays ago, not (always) Sunday   
      
   There was a conversation in the SYNCHRONET echo/conference about message   
   import ordering and it occurred to me that SBBSecho shouldn't always start the   
   bundle search/unpack with Sunday (*.SU?) as we might import bundles out of   
   order if multiple bundles spanning multiple days came in at once (or were   
   collected over time without running SBBSecho import). Of course, the whole   
   "day of week" naming scheme doesn't work very well if the link is in a   
   different time zone, but this is no less accurate than just always starting the   
   search from Sunday (*.SU*) and will usually be more "chronologically" accurate.   
      
   Using UTC to determine the current "day of week" for creating and consuming   
   bundles would be more deterministic, but alas, it's not how things have been   
   done (anyone have a document/reference for the origination of the defacto   
   bundle naming scheme?).   
      
   FSC-23 refers to this scheme as "Day-of-week bullshit", and I have to agree.   
   UTC Day of year would've been a much better chronological and sequential   
   naming scheme, but I think some systems were sensistive to the size of bundles   
   and packets and needed them split-up and the DOS 8.3 filename limitation had   
   to be designed around.   
      
   One solution is to just always transfer packets and never bundles since packets   
   are usually unambiguously and sequentially named (SBBSecho supports this just   
   fine).   
      
   Increment version to 3.35   
   --- SBBSecho 3.34-Linux   
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)   
   SEEN-BY: 103/705 105/81 106/201 124/5016 128/187 129/14 153/757 7715   
   SEEN-BY: 154/10 30 110 203/0 218/700 221/0 226/30 227/114 229/110   
   SEEN-BY: 229/134 206 317 400 426 428 470 700 705 240/1120 5832 263/1   
   SEEN-BY: 266/512 280/464 5003 5006 291/111 292/8125 301/1 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 341/66 234 342/200 396/45 423/120 460/58 256 1124   
   SEEN-BY: 633/280 712/848 770/1 902/26 5020/400 8912 5054/30 5075/35   
   PATH: 103/705 280/464 460/58 229/426   
      

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca