SORRY TO SAY THIS BUT I AM DELETING THIS STUPID BBS AND FORGETTING THIS SHIT ONCE FOR ALL. I HAVE SPENT TOO MUCH TIME TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK. FUCK YOU ALL !!Mad bro?
---
* Synchronet * DAPROSE-BBS - http://bbs.daprose.net
Jeez. I've never seen someone have an outburst like that. Are you 12? Its
really not that difficult to setup a BBS. I am thinking, you probably do not need to be here in the first place, if you cannot setup your BBS with minimal support from other folks... I would have hated to see you try and
you! Somehow, with time, we will be able to enjoy ourselves once again, knowing that you have left.
I forgot about that dude; he posted that message quite a while ago now. Thanks for the reminder, it made me laugh.
SORRY TO SAY THIS BUT I AM DELETING THIS STUPID BBS AND FORGETTING
THIS SHIT ONCE FOR ALL. I HAVE SPENT TOO MUCH TIME TRYING TO MAKE IT
WORK. FUCK YOU ALL !!
Mad bro?
Jeez. I've never seen someone have an outburst like that. Are you 12? Its really not that difficult to setup a BBS. I am thinking, you probably do
Re: GOODBYE EVERYBODY, REMOVING SYNCHRONET AND FORGETTING THIS PROJECTRun fast and don't let the door hit ya in the posterior. Go back to mommy's basement you nutcase.
By: Peter to All on Tue Dec 01 2015 07:25 pm
SORRY TO SAY THIS BUT I AM DELETING THIS STUPID BBS AND FORGETTING THIS SHIT ONCE FOR ALL. I HAVE SPENT TOO MUCH TIME TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK. F YOU ALL !!
echicken wrote to Ayex <=-
Synchronet is very easy to set up, but when it comes to customization
or quirky bits of configuration, it just doesn't "click" for some
people. I like to give them the benefit of the doubt for a little
while, but if they're still really confused after asking their 50th question ... yeah, they should probably just walk away.
Ayex wrote to echicken <=-
I laughed. I had to reply. I just got my new board connected and SBBS setup and was laughing at this. Been BBS'ing a while and I dont think I ever saw this. I would never post something like this. You guys always help when asked. And yea, its a little tough for certain things, but
Rob has done an outstanding job at SBBS. I am impressed every time I
see it in a new version. Now if I can only get my stupid email
recieving on 587 Id be good. :)
Yes, to get Synchronet up and running is quite easy. I've also found enabling some of the extra functionality, like mailing lists, is also fairly easy. What I haven't yet got around to is the customisation thing, tweaking menus, etc. Not in a big hurry, but will eventually want to get around to it.
Overall, Synchronet is an awesome BBS package. I'm beginning to use it as an alternative to web forums, because it gives you some level of web access, plus a multitude of other access methods - there's pretty much something for everyone.
I laughed. I had to reply. I just got my new board connected and SBBS setup and was laughing at this. Been BBS'ing a while and I dont think I ever saw this. I would never post something like this. You guys always help when asked. And yea, its a little tough for certain things, but Rob
Synchronet is very easy to set up, but when it comes to customization or quirk bits of configuration, it just doesn't "click" for some people.
I like to give them the benefit of the doubt for a little while, but if they're still really confused after asking their 50th question ...
yeah, they should probably just walk away.
Jeff Smith wrote to echicken <=-
The Win32 version of SBBS is easy to setup and get running. The Linux version is only marginally harder to compile once you have the few
runtime requirements
installed. The only real challenge as I see it is the customization or personalization of SBBS to ones needs and/or tastes.
Each BBS package has it's different ways of doing some things and I
enjoy the challenge of understanding the why's and how's of how the software works. That is why I had some degree of not understanding the attitude of the individual in
question.
Baja is absurdly simple, I was able to originally download elite command shell as it did what I wanted and study it in detail, then after awhile I was able to write my own command shell from scratch. I am not very good and Javascript and don't understand most of it, but I feel almost anyone should at least be able to compile a command menu shell in baja and if not then download one from the various filebases people offer.
Wow! That's what I call necroposting the dead! loll
I remember him. I had not seen an outburst like that since then. It seems that every so often, we get someone who tries to set up a Synchronet BBS and becomes very antagonistic to everyone who tries to help them, then they have an outburst and then leave. I think this Peter ended up setting up switching to Mystic, but I don't know how far he got with that.
I had my board crash when I upgraded, I got pissed and walked away for a bit and reloaded and restored it to the previous day and called it even. Even I didn't vlow up like that, damn.
I remember him. I had not seen an outburst like that since then. It
seems that every so often, we get someone who tries to set up a
Synchronet BBS and becomes very antagonistic to everyone who tries
to help them, then they have an outburst and then leave. I think
this Peter ended up setting up switching to Mystic, but I don't know
how far he got with that.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I think customizing the menus is one thing that seems different about Synchronet compared to other BBS software. Other BBS software I've
used has had a menu editor program that lets you specify your menu
logic by creating menus and menu items. Synchronet uses a script to control its menu logic, and you have to make that script yourself (or
copy an existing script and modify it).
The Win32 version of SBBS is easy to setup and get running. The Linux
version is only marginally harder to compile once you have the few
runtime requirements installed. The only real challenge as I see it is
the customization or personalization of SBBS to ones needs and/or tastes.
Only issue I had with the Linux installation is the compile time is significan ( over an hour) on a Pi 1B+, but it installed smoothly. ;)
Each BBS package has it's different ways of doing some things and I
enjoy the challenge of understanding the why's and how's of how the
software works. That is why I had some degree of not understanding the
attitude of the individual in
question.
True. I've got my head around the messaging and networking of SBBS (on severa FTNS and hosting a couple of QWK nets), customisation is going to
take a bit longer, haven't yet looked closely at how the menus are configured.
Jeff Smith wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Only issue I had with the Linux installation is the compile time is significan ( over an hour) on a Pi 1B+, but it installed smoothly. ;)
Must be the difference in the hardware as SBBS compiled here in less
than 12 minutes on a 10 core 64b pc with 32 gb of ram.
Only problem I have is the 2D address support in SBBSECHO when handling point AKA's.
As I see it as a Sysop the personalization of one's BBS is a seemingly never ending process. <g>
Only problem I have is the 2D address support in SBBSECHO when
handling point AKA's.
Tony Langdon wrote to Jeff Smith <=-
@VIA: VERT
@MSGID: <584296C5.38613.sync_sys@vert.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <58427FB3.38611.sync_sys@vert.synchro.net>
@TZ: 0258
Jeff Smith wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Only issue I had with the Linux installation is the compile time is significan ( over an hour) on a Pi 1B+, but it installed smoothly. ;)
Must be the difference in the hardware as SBBS compiled here in less
than 12 minutes on a 10 core 64b pc with 32 gb of ram.
Yes, I'm sure the difference in hardware would explain the compile
time. :)
Only issue I had with the Linux installation is the compile time is
significan ( over an hour) on a Pi 1B+, but it installed smoothly.
;)
Must be the difference in the hardware as SBBS compiled here in less
than 12 minutes on a 10 core 64b pc with 32 gb of ram.
Only problem I have is the 2D address support in SBBSECHO when
handling point AKA's.
As I see it as a Sysop the personalization of one's BBS is a seemingly never ending process. <g>
Sampsa wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I wonder if there would be some way to cross-compile stuff for RPi's on x86 boxes (I know the mechanism exists in gcc, just not sure what you'd have to change - the MBSE configure + makefile support
cross-compilaton)
Accession wrote to Jeff Smith <=-
Must be a fairly large difference between the Pi 1B+ and the Pi 3 as
well, as it only took (maybe) 15 minutes to compile here as well.
the boss node's 2D address. Synchronet (sbbsecho) acting as the boss
node then puts it's 2D address in the PATH as well, so you get two of
the same address. I
don't know if that was ever fixed or not. But I would think if some
other software were to put it's point address in the PATH, sbbsecho
should see that and pass it along without appending the same 2D
address.
This may have been fixed already. I remember bringing it up some time
ago, but haven't used any points off Synchronet lately.
As I see it as a Sysop the personalization of one's BBS is a seemingly never ending process. <g>
This is probably one of the truest statements of the BBS scene, ever.
:)
Even when you think you're done and happy with it. At some point you
say to yourself "it would be nice to have this" and off you go again.
Tony Langdon wrote to Sampsa <=-
@VIA: VERT
@MSGID: <58432A91.38621.sync_sys@vert.synchro.net>
@TZ: 0258
Sampsa wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I wonder if there would be some way to cross-compile stuff for RPi's on x86 boxes (I know the mechanism exists in gcc, just not sure what you'd have to change - the MBSE configure + makefile support
cross-compilaton)
Should be, though I've never tried cross compiling software. Oh, and
it's SBBS I'm wanting to compile, not MBSE, though at least some things could apply to both.
| Sysop: | Winzlo |
|---|---|
| Location: | Minnesota, USA |
| Users: | 11 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 495940:29:27 |
| Calls: | 82 |
| Files: | 1,070 |
| D/L today: |
27 files (11,920K bytes) |
| Messages: | 286,978 |