Hello Bob!

Oct 10 10:14 03, Bob Jones wrote to Bo Simonsen:

 BS>>> (A danish pop band did actually made a song there is
 BS>>> named Dr. Jones, are you a Ph.D? ;))

 BJ>> No, or not yet.....

 BS>> Are you studying?

 BJ> I need to get working on getting a teaching certificate.....  I 
 BJ> haven't investigated the options yet.  Probably would end up being a 
 BJ> Master's in Education, but who knows.  

If you are a master, it would only take 6 months or so, to get teaching compentence.

 BJ> I already have a master's in 
 BJ> software engineering, but that hasn't helped in the market over the 
 BJ> past two years.....  

Where do you want to teach? I would like to teach in High School, but it's
a long go from now..

Because then I've finished my education (next year about the same time),
then I need to study 14 month, then I got a BA in Computer Science or
Software Engeering (depends on the University). And then I need 2 years of
extra study, then I've a Master degree.

 BJ> I'm too odd ball for some of the folks in this 
 BJ> area, and areospace business is still depressed......

Areospace? 

 BJ>> Basically true.  But it is done that way because that is how Max is
 BJ>> coded for hooking into right now.....

 BS>> Okay, I didn't look so mutch in the WFC source, so I 
 BS>> know how things works..

 BS>> Actually I did more concentrate on Squish..

 BJ> Understand.....  And we've got a working Squish.  This is what I 
 BJ> expected, squish would become stable and (fully) functional before 
 BJ> Maximus would reach the same level of (its) usability.

Indeed, Maximus is quite more complicated.. I do actually not have anything
on my TODO list which goes about Squish.

 BS>>> Automatically it's multiline. (It's here..)

 BJ>> And how are you handling multiple telnet sessions at one time?

 BJ>> (a)  Are you Starting each up on a different tcp/ip port?

 BS>> No on the same.. It can just take more users.

 BJ> Ok.  Then I must have been hiting the timing bugs in my testing and 
 BJ> gave up too soon.  I have yet to succeed in getting two telnet 
 BJ> sessions to max running on the single startup....

Ok.

 BJ>> (b)  Are you running a copy of Maximus for each telnet session?

 BS>> No.. It starts automatically with the runbbs.sh script?

 BJ> The runbbs.sh script I thought only started up one copy of Maximus, 
 BJ> with only one sysop console, and I thought would only allow one 
 BJ> telnet connection in.  

Yes but it's still using the same telnet port.

 BJ> Now if a second concurrent telnet connection 
 BJ> is being allowed, I am gessing that the second sysop console is going 
 BJ> to the bit bucket, or the sysop console is going to look very 
 BJ> interesting.....

IMHO is the communication working well, I would presuiate if the MEX /
Filetransfer / QWK were working .. And local logon!

 BS>>> Well yes it handles only one telnet port, but more than
 BS>>> one can be logging into the system at one time!

 BJ> Ok.  I have yet to see that work on my linux system.....

Okay.

 BJ>> How are you starting maximus for this?  I don't think I've seen that
 BJ>> work.  How are the BBS sysop consoles handled in this siutation?

 BS>> I'm using the script which is included in the contrib 
 BS>> dir afair.. Here is it:

 BJ> Ok.  I think I was using the stock runbbs.sh for starting the telnet 
 BJ> at one point.  At a later point the telnet stuff went bust, and I 
 BJ> haven't applied your (old library) fix for that yet.  It's also 
 BJ> possible that I made my own runbbs.sh or modified it based on my 
 BJ> understanding of things, or that I'm running an older copy of it.....

Okay..

 BS>> === Cut ===
 BS>> #! /bin/sh
 BS>> #
 BS>> # $Id: runbbs.sh,v 1.3 2003/07/05 00:13:51 wesgarland Exp $
 BS>> #
 BS>> # $Log: runbbs.sh,v $
 BS>> # Revision 1.3  2003/07/05 00:13:51  wesgarland
 BS>> # Fixed bugs processing echomail/netmail, etc
 BS>> #
 BS>> # Revision 1.1  2003/06/12 02:09:56  wesgarland
 BS>> # Initial Revision
 BS>> #
 BJ>  ...
 BS>> === Cut ===

 BJ> I may be running an older version....  Hmmmm.....  Yup, I'm running 
 BJ> version 1.1.  I wonder why that wasn't updated.....  Hmmmm.....  
 BJ> Interesting....  CVS is getting the new runbbs.sh script in my source 
 BJ> tree, but 'make install' is not installing it.....  I'll have to look 
 BJ> into this.  This (and possibly other files not getting copied on 
 BJ> 'make install') is probably why the telnet code broke for me.....  
 BJ> And maybe why I'm looking some echo / netmail....  Hmmmm..

Hmm.. I don't quite unstand what bug he's describing in Revision 1.3

 BS>> Hmm.. Afaik is the sysop login just starting up like 
 BS>> another maximus process?

 BJ> Depends on how you start it up.  I've been using 'bin/max -k' to log 
 BJ> in on the sysop console.  In that case, I am comming in differently 
 BJ> then telnet or serial port / modem connections, but is running 
 BJ> another copy of maximus as it's own process.  

Indeed, my experience too.

 BJ> This is like how I run 
 BJ> a sysop login under OS/2 and leave my BBS up on the other nodes.  
 BJ> When running under regular DOS (with out any multi-tasker), you had 
 BJ> to take the BBS down to log in on the sysop console (again with the 
 BJ> -k option).

Yes, like every other BBS system, it was quite annoying, the same while
reading mail under DOS couldn't your mailer answer calls.

 BS>> Or is the sysop console the WFC screen?

 BJ> The 'sysop console', from my view, is one per maximus session.  So 
 BJ> each potential maximus session (telnet connection or dial-in modem / 
 BJ> serial port) needs it's own sysop console, at least that's how it is 
 BJ> under Win32 and OS/2 (and DOS running a multi-tasker like Desqview).  

It's the WFC screen?

 BJ> The WFC screen is what the sysop console screen sees waiting for 
 BJ> someone to connect.  Once connected, the sysop console can (usually, 
 BJ> the way I have it configured) shows what the usesr sees.  Now with 
 BJ> telnet support, you can have two command windows open, one running 
 BJ> maximus (with the sysop console up) and the other running telnet 
 BJ> connected to the BBS.  When you have both windows up (able to be done 
 BJ> under X), you see the duplication between the two windows.  Hmmm....  
 BJ> Maybe that's part of my problem...  I'm running under X instead of 
 BJ> the 4 (or more) virtual system consoles you get when not running X 
 BJ> windows.

Oh I see, it was so then Wes just did port it..


 BJ>> Because maximus (under DOS, Win32 and OS/2) does not support native
 BJ>> telnet.

 BS>> But it could (easyly?) be ported, for win32.. I'm not scure about 
 BS>> OS/2..

 BJ> It should port back to both Win32 and OS/2 platforms that have TCP/IP 
 BJ> support. 

Good.

 BS>> Well Wes is modulizing the communication module, so on 
 BS>> DOS you only compiles the "POTS" module..

 BJ> Which is reasonable.  That will leave compatibility for recompiling 
 BJ> the code for DOS, Win32 and OS/2 and allow them to run as they 
 BJ> currently do (if someone gets that development environment working) 
 BJ> and would allow us to take the telnet code back to Win32 and OS/2 if 
 BJ> someone can help on those platforms....

Absolutely. I bet there would be other changes than the TELNET thing, then
we get so far.. A QWK tosser would be very nice to include too. As a
plugin.

 BJ> Take care.....

 BJ> Bob Jones, 1:343/41

G'day mr. Jones,

Regards,
Bo

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2