| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 15.10.99 20:34l 203 Lines 7253 Bytes #-9717 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_260D
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/260D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0NHM<DB0ERF<DB0HOT<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<
SP6KBL<SP6YCU<SR6DJG<SR6DJC<SR9ZAA<PP5BLU<IW9EXL<SV1AAW<SV1AAW<EA7URC<
PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991015/1421Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:8154 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_260
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21358 ; Fri, 15 Oct 99 13:31:23 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016418 ; Fri, 15 Oct 99 08:04:11 MET
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 99 08:01:03 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_260D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/260D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
I thought someone was doing a PSK31 for Linux, but I haven't had time
to play with that or anything. Pretty much anything HF on Linux is not
so great. All I really now about is the Pactor 2 code built into
xfbb.
>Where is the server to gateway telnet <-> net/rom <-> CLOVER <-> PACTOR?
Okay, you can gateway telnet to netrom by running the linuxnode. It should
be somewhere on radio.linux.org.au. For HF modes, pretty much it's not there
in the OS at all. I wrote some code for my PK232 to gateway to Linuxnode,
and pretty much anyone who connects there can do anything, including going to
the BBS or connecting to netrom nodes in Berkeley/San Francisco. This works
okay, except the DCD on the PK232 is pretty weak.
If you're programming this kind of stuff, it's reasably easy, since you just
need to
make a stdioin/stdioout interface to your hardware. And if you run it from
Linuxnode,
then anyone can call out using that hardware.
>Where is the BBS message <-> smtp gateway?
>Where is the BBS bulletin <-> nntp gateway?
Look for mailgw on radio.linux.org.au. It's pretty wonky, since you need to
edit
your sendmail.cf file to get it up properly. Though mailgw supports both
smtp and nntp. Also to gateway to nntp, you need to
be running nntp, and that's a bit involved. Still, if you want to run news,
I'm not
aware of anything on DOS/Win98 type platforms that's equivalent to inn.
Basically, it works, and there are guys on the newsgroup who have been
through all the problems.
>Where is NET/ROM over Ethernet?
There's a section in ax25-howto called 'Creating a BPQ ethernet device'. I
think
this is what you're talking about. I don't use this since I do all my ax25
from only
one machine.
>Where is IP over NET/ROM?
Hmm, you should be able to use 'route' to route ip over NETROM just like
a regular ax25 connection. I don't do this, but I believe this is something
that does work.
>
>> Software: Except for above, everything else comes in the "network"
>portion of
>> the distribution. Also, recompile the kernel for AX.25 support.
>
>I did this. Simple. And I had nothing useful.
>It did not route IP over NET/ROM, just for one example.
Hmm, that's odd. Did you get NET/ROM running at all? You probably
want to be on the linux-hams list at vger.rutgers.edu if you're really going
to work with this stuff.
>
>See above "Where is".
>
>> Most hams do not ...: Any evidence to back this assumption? Also, since
>Linux
>> is free, cost isn't a problem (yes, most hams I know are cheap).
>>
>> Not of interest to you: That's not debatable.
>>
>> > But in any case I am not looking for solutions. Those I can create.
>> >
>> > I am looking for ideas about WHAT problems might be solved,
>> > and how the applications that implement those solutions might
>> > be structured so they would be of interest to hams.
>>
>> THe one big problem is the "anarchy" problem. Everyone does their own
>thing or
>> wants to be the "big fish of the pond," etc. Good luck with this one.
>
>Suggestions?
>
>> > Your points about installation are well taken, and "simple"
>> > installation is a part of what I am working on now.
>>
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 19:47:33 +0000
From: "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Charles Brabham wrote:
D. Stussy <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.10.9910130807320.551-100000@dns.bde-arc.ampr.org...
> > >
> > > I have Linux.
> > > Did not find any such software.
> > > Most hams do not (and will not) have Linux.
> > > So Linux is not of interest to me.
> >
> > Didn't find: Well, you need the package called "ax25-utils".
> > The file [/usr/src/]linux/Documentation/networking/ax25.txt tells you
> > where to get this, and the "how-to" file.
>
> Most of us have nothing better to do with our time than to sift through
> hundreds of obscure text files, hoping to accidently find just the right one
> and figure out how to massage our software into at least semi-functionality.
>
> That's why everybody is using LINUX, right? The thrill of the hunt?
>
> >
> > Most hams do not ...: Any evidence to back this assumption? Also, since
> Linux
> > is free, cost isn't a problem (yes, most hams I know are cheap).
>
> The more recent distributions of LINUX cost about the same as a copy of
> Win98.
>
> I have yet to know a single perason who got LINUX for "free". Everyone I
> know coughed up between 30-80 bucks, depending on how recent a copy they
> wanted.
>
> "Technically", LINUX is free. Here on planet Earth though, we real humans
> tend to find ourselves paying through the nose for it. In fact, by the time
> you buy "add ons" to make up for functions not originally provided by the
> distro, you can easily end up paying more than you would for more competent
> software with wider compatability, like Win95/98.
Now you know of at least ONE. I got it for free by downloading the slackware
distribution (via FTP) off the Internet back in 1997. I grabbed the "A", "D",
and "N" sets. The "A" and "N" sets can still [even today] be copied to
floppies for installation - if one doesn't have the hard disk space available
to perform an installation from a DOS partition. Everything else since then,
I
grabbed in source code and compiled myself.
I hardly call Windows 95 "competent" software. On one day, I repeatedly was
graced by the "Blue Screen of Death" over 50 times. Linux, being a UNIX
clone,
doesn't suffer the problem of crashing the entire machine when one program
fails.
I run both systems: I have ONE Windows 95 (and there was no reason for me to
upgrade to '98) running on the same hardware as a Linux box (both are on
486DX2's at 66MHz, 32mb of 60ns 30-pin SIMM's, and identical motherboards).
There is alot of stuff where the Linux box is faster in doing as compared to
the Windows box, but not everything. The only reason I even keep the Windows
box is because I use that computer for my business also and many of the
programs simply don't have unix ports (yet). [BTW, although I only have the
ONE windows box, I have 3 linux boxes, with others in various stages of
construction and installation.]
> You are quite welcome to LINUX. I've tried it, and somehow I wasn't very
> impressed. This is one bit of "free" software that is just not worth the
> price.
Linux version 2 is a lot better than the version 1 based series of kernels.
Maybe you should try again.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 20:14:40 +0000
From: "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Hank Oredson wrote:
D. Stussy <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message
> news:Pine.LNX.4.10.9910130807320.551-100000@dns.bde-arc.ampr.org...
To be continued in digest: hd_99_260E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
