• Re: Switch to linux

    From Andre Robitaille@1:154/70 to g00r00 on Thu Aug 20 13:50:34 2020
    On 20 Aug 2020, g00r00 said the following...

    That's already how it works, but ./ is required to specify current directory (even if you're in it).

    That's true, but I mean have Mystic figure that out for the user, so they
    don't have to know that or figure it out.

    Maybe the logic to error check what someone puts into the field becomes too complex though. I would say that documentation should take priority over a technical fix like I was suggesting earlier.


    - Andre

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Runaan BBS (1:154/70)
  • From Andre Robitaille@1:154/70 to Nicholas Boel on Fri Aug 21 19:42:50 2020
    On 21 Aug 2020, Nicholas Boel said the following...

    Because newcomers to linux shouldn't have it *that* easy.

    Things need to be either intuitive or documented.

    Linux has an abundance of documentation and books, so while it's not easy,
    it can be understood.

    The shell field of the event editor is neither intuitive nor documented. If anything, it's a right of passage.


    - Andre

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Runaan BBS (1:154/70)
  • From Andre Robitaille@1:154/70 to g00r00 on Sat Aug 22 07:02:06 2020
    On 22 Aug 2020, g00r00 said the following...

    I agree the event stuff needs to be gathered from whatsnews and put onto the Wiki. I'll look into doing that the next time I am on there making edits.

    It doesn't look like an easy job, for sure. I didn't realize that there was useful info in there that wasn't in the documentation until maybe a week in. Now I just let people know to check there and in the command reference, since there's some useful bits in there too.

    But I am curious why you're saying the shell field is not
    intuitive or documented and what you have in mind to improve it?

    Having a view into your events status so you can easily spot an
    issue and then being able to determine what that error is in about 30 seconds of effort isn't exactly a bad system! Certainly better than
    most!

    The intuitive user menu systems, the interactive messaging system, and the sysop config menus are the reasons why I prefer Mystic over its competitors.
    So I 100% agree that the event editor is great.

    Here is my thought process as a new user a few weeks ago, which seems common
    as I've helped two or three people through the same thing:


    1. The shell field isn't intuitive partially because by default it has Windows commands in it, so I think it's already correct and working. (intuitive)

    2. Then I find that it's not processing FTN events properly, but the 'mis server' window and logs don't show any errors about it not finding mutil or fidopoll or both. (intuitive)

    3. Nothing tells me how it's supposed to look for Windows vs Linux, and
    nothing really tells me the process of import/export/fidopoll, and how to troubleshoot. (documentation)

    4. So through Mystic Guy videos, I can kind of tell that there are supposed
    to be files showing up that when processed disappear. So I determine that if fidopoll runs right, files will show up, and if they're processed by mutil those files will disappear. (documentation)

    5. Okay, so there must be something wrong with my shell field. What are the pipes for? Are they actually piping anything, or is it like ';' in Linux?
    It's not using & or && like Windows expects, so I'm extra confused. Does it need spaces? Commas? (intuitive and documentation)

    6. The mis server window and logs lead me to believe that both comamnds in
    the shell field are at least being called, but I'm not totally sure. (intuitive)

    7. So maybe it's a path issue. Should I use ./ or a full path. I'll try explicitly calling the path since I can't go wrong with that. (intuitive and documentation).


    - Andre

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Runaan BBS (1:154/70)
  • From Nicholas Boel@1:154/10 to Andre Robitaille on Sat Aug 22 08:47:46 2020
    Hello Andre,

    On Fri Aug 21 2020 19:42:50, Andre Robitaille wrote to Nicholas Boel:

    Linux has an abundance of documentation and books, so while it's not
    easy, it can be understood.

    The shell field of the event editor is neither intuitive nor
    documented. If anything, it's a right of passage.

    Does it need to be?

    If you were to google "how to execute a binary in Linux" I think your answer would be the first to come up tho. I don't understand why it's Mystic's responsibility to show people that?

    Even in Windows, one way to make sure of proper execution is to use the full path to the executable. This also works in Linux and then _doesn't_ require "./" to execute.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... "Take my advice, I don't use it anyway."
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20181215
    * Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Nicholas Boel@1:154/10 to g00r00 on Sat Aug 22 09:06:56 2020
    Hello g00r00,

    On Sat Aug 22 2020 00:38:36, g00r00 wrote to Andre Robitaille:

    The ./ thing specifically is tricky because its not Mystic, its Linux.
    By trying to explain it I'd be getting into trying to teach people how Linux works. There are times when adding a ./ would break things too.
    Its a deep rabbit hole to jump into in terms of documenting, and maybe better suited for linking to some how-to Linux guides or something.

    Best practice would be to use the complete path to the executable, just like in Windows.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... "Take my advice, I don't use it anyway."
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20181215
    * Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Andre Robitaille@1:154/70 to Nicholas Boel on Sat Aug 22 09:54:56 2020
    On 22 Aug 2020, Nicholas Boel said the following...

    Does it need to be?

    Of course it does. Always.

    Software should always be as intuitive and well-documented as possible. There are zero exceptions to this. Often you can reduce the amound of documentation if the UI is sufficiently intuitive.

    I certanily miss the old days where few people had computers, and the ones
    who did knew how to use them because they were tinkerers and hackers and whatever. But relying on search engines and other offloading documentation
    onto proactive endusers? I'm surprised that this is even considered to
    possibly be okay.

    - Andre`

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A45 2020/02/18 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Runaan BBS (1:154/70)
  • From g00r00@1:129/215 to Andre Robitaille on Sat Aug 22 10:49:14 2020
    It doesn't look like an easy job, for sure. I didn't realize that there was useful info in there that wasn't in the documentation until maybe a week in. Now I just let people know to check there and in the command reference, since there's some useful bits in there too.

    My documentation of new features goes into the "whatsnew" file with each build I release, and then into the whatsnew section on the Wiki, and eventually it will find its way into a more organized place on the Wiki.

    Its a bad way to do things, mostly because of how infrequently I work on the structured part of the Wiki. The information is out there its just not always easy to find depending on what you're looking for.

    Documentation is certainly unintuitive because of that.

    1. The shell field isn't intuitive partially because by default it has Windows commands in it, so I think it's already correct and working. (intuitive)

    The default event examples are not specific to Windows or anything really, they're just examples. You could use them for any OS Mystic runs on or not use them at all.

    2. Then I find that it's not processing FTN events properly, but the 'mis server' window and logs don't show any errors about it not finding mutil or fidopoll or both. (intuitive)

    Mystic events log and track previous results of every event it runs. Shell events are listed in the event window with a "time until execution" and when they do execute it shows that its running, shows exactly what commands it is executing, and then shows you the result reported back by the OS. All of that is logged and in the UI.

    There is only so much Mystic can track when executing an unknown user configured command line as an event, and it does just about everything it can. Do you see it run on the screen and logs? If so what is the result?

    MIS can only show that an event ran, what it tried to run, and if the OS says it ran successfully. If it says it ran successfully then you'd need to look at the logs of the program it ran.

    3. Nothing tells me how it's supposed to look for Windows vs Linux, and

    The commands for everything in Mystic are the same regardless of OS so there really isn't much to document as far as differences in how Mystic works.

    4. So through Mystic Guy videos, I can kind of tell that there are supposed to be files showing up that when processed disappear. So I determine that if fidopoll runs right, files will show up, and if
    they're processed by mutil those files will disappear. (documentation)

    I am assuming you're watching the YouTube series on how to setup FidoNet network on a Pi. In the video it goes through the various steps and shows log files and what should be in the log files. It pulls for mail manually with fidopoll to show the mail exchange is setup properly. Have you done all of this stuff and did it all work?

    If the messy documentation combined with this video series isn't sufficient, then what do you feel should be added to make it better?

    5. Okay, so there must be something wrong with my shell field. What are the pipes for? Are they actually piping anything, or is it like ';' in Linux? It's not using & or && like Windows expects, so I'm extra
    confused. Does it need spaces? Commas? (intuitive and documentation)

    Here is the documentation for the semaphore/shell type pasted from the Wiki. It seems clear enough to me but I suspect you never saw it. Finding it *IS* unintuitive because its tucked away in the WHATSNEW section on the Wiki (I
    left an update to TYPE1 out because this message is already getting long)

    TYPE1: Semaphore
    ================
    This event type listens for one or more "semaphore" files, and will execute
    a command line if one or more of the semaphore files are found. Prior to
    executing the command line, MIS will also delete the detected semaphores.

    The following options are used for Semaphore type events. Any other
    options not mentioned here can be ignored for this type:

    Active - If yes this event will be active. Set to No to disable.
    Description - This can be any description you want.
    Exec Type - This is one of BBS, Shell, or Semaphore
    Semaphore - This defines the semaphore filename to "look" for. If
    there is no path included, Mystic will automatically look
    in the configured semaphore directory. In addition, more
    than one semaphore file can be monitored by using a pipe
    symbol to separate them (|). For example:

    Semaphore: echomail.out|netmail.out

    The above example will look for the existance of EITHER
    echomail.out or netmail.out in the configured semaphore
    directory. If either file is found, the event will remove
    the semaphore files and then execute the event.

    Semaphore: c:\mybbs\somefile.txt

    The above will list for the c:\mybbs\somefile.txt and
    trigger the event if it is found.

    Shell - This is the command line which will be executed when the
    event is triggered. Similar to the Semaphore detection,
    this can have one *or more* executions per event each
    separated by a pipe. If no path is supplied, MIS will
    default to the root Mystic BBS directory. For example:

    Shell: domail.bat

    The above example will execute domail.bat in the root
    Mystic BBS directory.

    Shell: mutil export.ini|fidopoll send|mutil import.ini

    The above will execute 3 command lines in a row:

    mutil export.ini
    fidopoll send
    mutil import.ini

    If we put it all together we can get something like this:

    Active: Yes
    Description: Send outgoing echomail
    Exec Type: Semaphore
    Semaphore: echomail.out|netmail.out
    Shell: mutil export.ini|fidopoll send|mutil import.ini

    The above example wait for echomail or netmail.out, and
    execute mutil to export, then fidopoll to send, then
    mutil to import any new packets. Completely automated!

    TYPE2: Shell
    ============
    This event type executes at a defined time, defined on a weekly schedule.

    When the event executes, it will execute the Shell command line. Like the
    Semaphore event type, this Shell command can also execute multiple command
    lines by separating them with a pipe character (|).

    The different between this type and Semaphore is that instead of waiting
    for a file, the event is defined by a specific execution time. This is
    defined by picking which days of the week the event should execute, and
    what time per day it should be ran (in 24-hour format). For example:

    Active: Yes
    Description: Pack message bases
    Exec Type: Shell
    Shell: mutil msgpack.ini
    Exec Hour: 01
    Exec Min: 30

    Sun: No Mon: Yes Tue: No Wed: No Thu: No Fri: No Sat: No

    The above event would execute once per week, at 1:30am on Monday morning
    and execute the command line "mutil msgpack.ini" from the root Mystic BBS
    directory.

    7. So maybe it's a path issue. Should I use ./ or a full path. I'll try explicitly calling the path since I can't go wrong with that. (intuitive and documentation).

    Maybe the documentation could link to some "how to use Linux" tutorials or some stackoverflow question on "what does ./ mean in Linux" and that could be helpful.

    There really isn't one answer for this and its not something determined by Mystic. Its determined by your Linux setup, what you have in your path, what you're executing, etc. Mystic just executes what you tell it to execute, its up to you to understand how the OS works and what you need to put in that field. I would guess that you need to put a ./ though.

    Thanks for the feedback!

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/22 (Windows/64)
    * Origin: Sector 7 | Mystic WHQ (1:129/215)
  • From Rick Smith@1:340/202.1 to g00r00 on Sat Aug 22 18:14:00 2020
    Greetings g00r00!

    Answering a msg of <22 Aug 20>, from you to Andre Robitaille, about Re: Switch to linux:

    I got everything to work on the pI4 except python a couple python scripts result in mismatch apt errors, so for now just stopped using the script (anipause) I ultimately after 24 hours had to switch back to my windows setup. I realized while everything was polling and running mutil with result 0 the mail was nowhere to be found. I could get netmail back and fourth mostly but no echo mail posted on the pi mystic would go anywhere. all my paths are correct, I even after developing blurry eyes had another sysop ssh in and he was unable to find what it could be.. Not even sure why I am telling you this as I have no idea where to look Ive read everything I can read triple checked every INI file. Possibly I will watch mystic guys pi mystic setup videos and see if there is something I am missing. For now its back on my nuc running windows so no worries.

    PS is there a way to resize mystic windows in linux? or rather just have mystic match size of terminal windows?

    Hope you are well


    ----
    Regards,


    Rick Smith (Nitro)

    ... BBSing very long distance - from Atascadero, California
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
    * Origin: ----> Abacus Sysop Point --->>>>bbs.abon.us:2323 (1:340/202.1)
  • From Nicholas Boel@1:154/10 to Andre Robitaille on Mon Aug 24 16:58:10 2020
    Hello Andre,

    On Sat Aug 22 2020 09:54:56, Andre Robitaille wrote to Nicholas Boel:

    Does it need to be?

    Of course it does. Always.

    Software should always be as intuitive and well-documented as
    possible. There are zero exceptions to this. Often you can reduce the amound of documentation if the UI is sufficiently intuitive.

    I certanily miss the old days where few people had computers, and the
    ones who did knew how to use them because they were tinkerers and
    hackers and whatever. But relying on search engines and other
    offloading documentation onto proactive endusers? I'm surprised that
    this is even considered to possibly be okay.

    While I totally get what you're saying, and in many cases you're definitely right. But, *Basic* Linux 101 should probably be known before trying to run servers on it. Don't you think?

    Maybe James ASSUMEd that was the case, and originally thought the user of said operating system would know how to execute a shell command. Other than that, it doesn't hurt anything if it was added for those that don't know, I guess. ;)

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... "Take my advice, I don't use it anyway."
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20181215
    * Origin: thePharcyde_ distribution system (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)