Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!rpi!pawl13.pawl.rpi.edu!kudla
From: kudla@pawl.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: BBS programs
Message-ID: <1146@rpi.edu>
Date: 7 Apr 89 03:22:18 GMT
References: <12487@louie.udel.EDU>
Sender: usenet@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Lines: 58

In article <12487@louie.udel.EDU> LIZAK98%SNYBUFVA.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu (A SHOW OF HANDS) writes:
>There are a few PD BBS programs available such as Tag.  Tag seems to be
>the best choice, as the source code (in C) is readily available.  My

Really?? When I was running it, I called the support board, and the sysop
told me there was no way he would give the source out! (Which cramped my
style a good bit, because TAG could be a good board with some minor changes)
I got Citadel and LINKBBS from a local board, and though I haven't tried
to set up Link, the Citadel's configuration program gives me a software
error (GOMF catches it) every time I try to use it..... (Any clues on that?)

>understanding is that New Image software (The ex C-Net 64/128) people are
>planning an Amiga version of Image BBS, which if true, promises to be a
>good program both user and sysop side, just as long as they speed the baby
>up.

I'd say..... and it had better not be written in BASIC again, and I hope
it's under new management or something as well, because I had friends who
ran Cnet on the 64 and 128 and customer support was ABOMINABLE (the support
BBS was mainly used to accuse people of violating this or that copyright
rule).

>never saw Atredes up until yesterday (a local system put it online)... and I
>was VERY disappointed.  From the flyer I picked up at World of Commodore from
>Incognito, it looked like we were going to have a decent BBS program finally,

Sigh indeed. A board that had been running on BBS-PC for a year or so
changed to Atreides last week and it really sucks.... I was expecting
QBBS and got Color-64, so to speak.

>I wrote a BBS program, sadly to say, in BASIC, it ran OK but lagged in the
>I/O department.  I am slowly starting to rewrite it in C.  It mimicked the
>C-Net system for the C64.  I hope to finish it by the end of 1989, no rush

I'm working very slowly on a BBS as well (it's a bitch with only a one-meg
one-drive Amiga, let me tell you- though not as much of a bitch as it's
going to be for Mr. Corzine to write his Unix clone on it, I reckon). 
My problems are certainly not how to write a BBS- I wrote a fairly OK one
on the C64 years ago- but the specifics of programming the Amiga. It's one
confusing machine for me..... I can't figure out (1) how to attach a
console device to the current window, (2) how to go into one-character-at-a-
time mode without having to screw around with RAW:, and if I do, (3) how
to use RAW: (the RKM's are very confusing about it).... Ooops, I should
be saying rawmode, not RAW: since I'm using Exec, not AmigaDog.
(4) There are no good examples of code that use the serial port or open
the console device (again, the RKMs are severely lacking and what I do
have- vt100 2.4 or something and dnet- is to all appearances spaghetti
code).

So, given solutions to those problems (and some time to familiarize myself
with Lattice a bit) I might have my BBS done by christmas too.... The closest
analog to my idea I can give you would have to be QBBS or TBBS on the PC.
I plan to make it as flexible as possible, in other words.

Robert Jude Kudla "Disclaimers are for wimps"       userfw3s@rpitsmts.BITNET
\      //  Funk Bass: anything else is just grody.        kudla@pawl.rpi.edu
 \    //          "'Break these chains of love'? But they were _expensive_!"
/ \ \X/  Keywords: Oldfield Yes U2 REM Zeppelin F.G.T.H.  .....and even Rush