-=> CHARLES ANGELICH wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

 WC> There's a prompt screen on opening MM for both save
 WC> messages and read bulletin and all too often I'd hit enter
 WC> twice both opening MM and deleting unsent messages :-( I
 WC> grew annoyed at having written extensive texts,
 WC> inadvertantly deleted them before uploading only to find
 WC> the cluster unrecoverable due to having been overwritten.

 CA> This was my first reason to abandon MM. Happened to me once too
 CA> often.

The author changed it on my suggestion, now default is to save.

 WC>> Still haven't figured out what Verizon mail wants for
 WC>> authentication in SMTP despite many attempts. I've got to
 WC>> figure out what file defines what is in the mail.conf file
 WC>> and what Verizon's SMTP wants for authemtication.

 CA> Some want "username{at}domain.com" as the username but the prompt
 CA> states to enter just the "username". Some use
"mail.domain.com"
 CA> for both POP3 and SMTP servers. 
 
Hmm, one I've not tried here.
 
 CA> Famvid wants
 CA> "username{at}pop3.domain.com" for POP3 now. 
 
Verizon changed from SMTP to outgoing.verizon.net  which 
annoys me to no end. POP3 works just fine it's the damned
SMTP that fails. Oh yeah, they changed POP3 to "mail.verizon.net"
Hmm, maybe I need to alter the "proto" from smtp to 
outgoing.verizon.net in the appropriate file though I believe I've
already done that one and it bombed as the smtp was for
Linux internal protocol establishment.
Anyhow I'll append this post to another from you and play around 
some more. The other post being the one regarding the list server
which the few times I've tried to join has been unresponsive
to adding a user :-(
I also recently noted that www.dell.com returns "no data
in document" when I attempt to load their site, got there once,
or any of their links which always return "no data."
Since you're also running Win 3.1 and NSC 4.08 mind letting me
know if you've any luck?

 CA> It was the more
 CA> logical "pop3.domain.com" but SMTP is just
"smtp.domain.com".
 CA> Before this they used "mail.domain.com" for both POP3 and SMTP.
 CA> You have to ask or try all the variables till one 'clicks' and
 CA> when they decide to change these they don't bother to tell
 CA> anyone in advance either. :-\

Yeah :-( I tried to deduce it from a number of Netscape
files but as yet no joy. Prefs.js in NS looked promising,
perhaps with the above in mind I'll give it another look.
A daunting task however if one thinks about the permutations :-(
I'll have to post my inquiry in newsgroups.
Perhaps we need to START a Basic Linux newsgroup?

 CA> I also think that the standard port numbers for POP3 and SMTP
 CA> are sometimes changed. I don't recall right now what they are
 CA> but I seem to recall mention they _can_ be other than the
 CA> 'standard' ones?

 I'm pretty sure 25 is the right one due to the nature
 of the error message.
 
 RJT>> Somebody in the echo probably uses them.

 WC> I've made two fido inquiries so far, no joy. Need to
 WC> inquire in the alt.os.slackware.linux newsgroup.

 CA> Ask Verizon if possible?

BWAHAHAHA...
I've dealt with their tech support.
Might just as well ask Jeb Bush ;-)
Even senior techs are a real crapshoot and it take a LOT
of time to find a knowledgable one.

 WC>> Soon as X-Windows flies I'm nuking the old Slackware
 WC>> release and upgrading to 8.1

 CA> BasicLinux version 2.0 will be based on SlackWare v7.1 when
 CA> finished.

 Yeah right, I'll be pretty much  configured in 1.7
 by than I suppose and I'll want to nuke it.
 Many of the hotlist.html URL's currently listing 
 Slackware 3.5 sites are no longer valid
 so I guess moving to 7.1  is a necessary and good move.
 Oh well I can always nuke /hda4 instead after I get that 
 XF86Conf file right, that was always my intention 
 anyway than install BL 8.1 and download the /x packages
 for it and install with pkgtool using the XF86conf file
 from my old release as a template.

 WC> I'm just snagging it off the net. There's a new "Victor"
 WC> release linked to the Basic Linux site that occupies under
 WC> 350 meg full install for a 486 with 16 meg RAM. A Canadian
 WC> offers his particular "Victor" release shipped 15 dollars
 WC> U.S. with manual.

 CA> That's 'Vector' with an "e". I never asked Steve why he linked
 CA> to that particular mini-install but I'm guessing he thinks it's
 CA> a good one?

 Saw someone having trouble with it in alt.os.slackware.linux

My problem on this machine is the blasted proprietary
Creative CD-ROM sbpcd in Linuxspeak. Loads fine off the
disk, recognizes ALL the hardware but booting from
DOS leads to kernel panic while LILO works.
Probably just need to add the sbpcd parameter to the boot image
file as I've seen somewhere in the docs.
Later releases it will likely be too much of a pain to
support the sbpcd so it'll have to wait on the Pentium 
with EIDE CD.

 WC> I keep hearing you NEED to know VIM or VI, all but one
 WC> extranious command the same, in a rescue situation as that
 WC> may be the only editor available on rescue disks.

 CA> I _used_ to hear that VI was a requirement but not as often
 CA> anymore. The SCO editor looks just like MSDOS EDIT and there

 SCO ain't cheap! Or wasn't in 1994.

 CA> are several for Linux that are somewhere between VI and EDIT.
 CA> All are quite small and could fit on rescue disks.

 Pico is retardedly simple and appears lacking in features
 on first glace too. pico -w is the alias "edit" in Basic Linux 1.7.

 WC> Fortunately I've retained the ramdrive Basic Linux so I can
 WC> muck about with the hard drive version in hda2 or my old
 WC> release of Slackware in hda4. I really, short of a total
 WC> disk failure, don't see three partitions corrupting or
 WC> failing at the same time.

 CA> It is nice to have _something_ that can get you back online
 CA> when your main system goes down and BasicLinux can execute
 CA> without a hard drive. :-)

Haven't made up the two disk portable set yet and it' not something
I'd often have the opportunity to use though it'd be a hoot
to haul over to my landladies house.
Landlady has cable modem but geez she's using Windows XP
on a machine really not up to the task, under 800 MHz
so it's slower than Win 3.1 on the 66 MHz 486 dialup 28800!!!
I walked away from the machine in disgust.
Win XP sure is pretty... a lot like an oil painting ;-)
 
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.42