Nп/п : 64 из 85
От : Paul Hayton 3:770/100 28 фев 25 13:54:30
К : g00r00 28 фев 25 03:56:02
Тема : Re: Builds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 3:770/100 338e3cc4
@REPLY: 3:770/100 9bc46546
@TID: Mystic BBS 1.12 A48
@TZUTC: 1300
Welcome back, hope you`re doing well.
Just copying this post I sent you last year, not sure if you saw
it / there is/was any issues with the 64 bit build but just wanted
to spotlight this should you be doing any checking/work on Mystic in
the coming period.
Also do you envisage a release of A49 in the coming months? If
yes, I going to hold off any any video updates until after that`s out.
On 30 May 2024 at 09:55p, Paul Hayton pondered and said...
PH> On 29 May 2024 at 10:12p, g00r00 pondered and said...
PH>
PH> g0> This shoud be fixed in the latest prealpha build but still would of
PH> g0> course be mostly untested.
PH>
PH> Hi there.
PH>
PH> Just a note that I tried the 32bit RPi build installer and it failed to
PH> allow me to install to /mystic/ from the root directory. I tried the
PH> sudo ./install option and that did not work either. Just hit the unable
PH> to create /mystic/ message.
PH>
PH> If I opted for F5 use home directory it showed me the root path of
PH> /root/mystic so I can confirm I was acting with root privileges when I
PH> invoked sudo but hit the above mentioned problem.
PH>
PH> Also during an earlier test on the last 64 bit build I found I was having
PH> problems using `mis poll 21:1/100` when I set up 21:1/100 as a BinkP
PH> echomail node in Mystic.
PH>
PH> For whatever reason it looked like mis was polling out to the BinkP
PH> server but the receiving system on another machine on my LAN did not see
PH> any incoming connection from MIS on the Rpi..
PH>
PH> So just flagging there *may* be something in the Rpi code that *might*
PH> be amiss when `mis poll` is calling a binkP style echomail node?
PH>
PH> Another thing I spotted in the mutil.ini there`s a reference in
PH> whatsnew.txt to the new function EchoUnlink.
PH>
PH> ; exclude=MYSTIC
PH> ; exclude=FSX_*
PH>
PH> But the reason I mention this because I wanted to let you know that
PH> you`ve omitted the function call at the top of the mutil.ini
PH>
PH> ; EchoUnlink = false
PH>
PH> [time passes]
PH>
PH> I also ran a test using the exclude=FSX_* but have found it does not
PH> honour the switch, the reports I am generating `action_mode=0` are still
PH> flagging fsxNet bases that should be excluded. So something is may be
PH> up there also.
PH>
PH> I ran the function from mutil directly using ./mutil -run EcoUnlink
PH>
PH> Best, Paul
PH>
Kerr Avon [Blake`s 7] `I`m not expendable, I`m not stupid and I`m not going`
avon[at]bbs.nz | bbs.nz | fsxnet.nz
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)
SEEN-BY: 50/109 103/705 124/5016 153/757 154/10 30
203/0 218/840 220/70 221/0
SEEN-BY: 221/1 6 226/17 100 229/664 240/1120 5832
267/800 280/464 5003 5006
SEEN-BY: 292/854 8125 301/1 113 708 335/364 341/66
234 396/45 423/120 460/58
SEEN-BY: 467/888 633/280 712/848 770/1 3 100 340
772/210 220 230 5000/111
SEEN-BY: 5019/40 5020/329 400 715 830 848 1042
4441 12000 5030/49 1081
SEEN-BY: 5053/51 5061/133 5075/128 5083/1 444
@PATH: 770/100 1 280/464 301/1 5020/1042 4441