PS: is there a way to make Newsreaders (Pan) show color Ansi?
Ok, thats interesting. i might send out some more tests and watch how
the actual message looks outside the Newsreader, in the BBS.
I accidently messed up an smtp server setting in Thunderbird while
testing around with the newsgroups yesterday. Took me a while to add
that SMTP again and to find out that i have an application password for
that Email provider different from the providers website login =) LOL
still thinking about if i want to test slrn. Not sure if i want another
TUI interface for reading/posting messages.
On Sun, 2 Nov 2025 23:03:46 -0600, "MRO" (VERT/BBSESINF) wrote:
i made some funky test posts using Thunderbird and Pan on FSXNet.
The "From" field includes an email in one post
your from field contains an entire email?
sending this from Pan Newsreader as a test.
Mindsurfer
---
ï¿ Synchronet ï¿ FuNToPiA BBS - telnet://funtopia.synchro.net:3023 ssh:3022
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (723:1/0)
Mindsurfer wrote to Gamgee <=-
I have always preferred 'Pan'.
looks really decent. But in the short time i have tested Pan, i could not
make it show the actual message but the headers only.
Well, have you tried looking at the "View" section in the top toolbar?
I mean....
I have installed Pan once again to check if i missed a setting and what can i say. It does show the body now. No idea what was wrong before or
if it takes some time to load the body for each message after the
headers. i don't know.
PS: is there a way to make Newsreaders (Pan) show color Ansi?
PS: is there a way to make Newsreaders (Pan) show color Ansi?
Short answer, no.
Non-colored ansi (ascii) can be viewed in any newsreader that supports the CP437 charset. I'm not sure about Pan, but Claws Mail does, and Thunderbird does not. However, as soon as color is added, no newsreader that I've tried knows what an ANSI is. ;)
still thinking about if i want to test slrn. Not sure if i want another TUI
interface for reading/posting messages.
What TUI interfaces do you already have?
Mindsurfer wrote to Accession <=-
What TUI interfaces do you already have?
well, sitting in my BBS reading/writing messages, or connecting to the
LXC where the BBS resides via ssh terminal and doing stuff in the
terminal or using midnight commander to move files around. i just
thought it could be nice to zoom out a bit of the 80x25 matrix every
now and then and have a different interface for reading/writing
messages =) But it seems it is still the easiest and most convenient to just stay connected to you bbs the whole day and open the messages view when you feel like it ;)
ignore my repeated ansi question in my other message ;)
yeah, i thought that could be problematic. You can't have it all. =)
Pan is configurable in regards to the fonts. monochrome cp437 chars
should work there if you load the right font/ global codepage.
What TUI interfaces do you already have?
well, sitting in my BBS reading/writing messages, or connecting to the
LXC where the BBS resides via ssh terminal and doing stuff in the
terminal or using midnight commander to move files around. i just thought
it could be nice to zoom out a bit of the 80x25 matrix every now and then
and have a different interface for reading/writing messages =) But it
seems it is still the easiest and most convenient to just stay connected
to you bbs the whole day and open the messages view when you feel like it
;)
I find it easier/better to login to the BBS a few times a day, and download a QWK packet of messages to read/reply to in an offline mail reader. I use MultiMail, which seems to be the modern/popular choice, available for several operating systems.
Mindsurfer wrote to Gamgee <=-
I find it easier/better to login to the BBS a few times a day, and download a QWK packet of messages to read/reply to in an offline mail reader. I use MultiMail, which seems to be the modern/popular choice, available for several operating systems.
Thats the other option. But you always have to login to download or
upload the qwk file. There is no option for the qwk up/download to be directly managed between the QWK reader and the BBS account?
Thats the other option. But you always have to login to download or
upload the qwk file. There is no option for the qwk up/download to be directly managed between the QWK reader and the BBS account?
Thats the other option. But you always have to login to download or uploa
the qwk file. There is no option for the qwk up/download to be directly
managed between the QWK reader and the BBS account?
Correct, there is no option for that.
Thats the other option. But you always have to login to download or
uploa the qwk file. There is no option for the qwk up/download to be
directly managed between the QWK reader and the BBS account?
Correct, there is no option for that.
You can FTP to the BBS and download a magic name "BBS.QWK" to download your new messages, and upload BBS.REP to upload your packet (change BBS to the name your BBS gives to QWK packets).
It's pretty handy here, I don't know if a lot of sysops open FTP on their firewalls though.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: NNTP(S) via Thunderbi
By: Gamgee to Mindsurfer on Tue Nov 04 2025 08:09 pm
Thats the other option. But you always have to login to download or uploa
the qwk file. There is no option for the qwk up/download to be directly
managed between the QWK reader and the BBS account?
Correct, there is no option for that.
You can FTP to the BBS and download a magic name "BBS.QWK" to download your new messages, and upload BBS.REP to upload your packet (change BBS
to the name your BBS gives to QWK packets).
It's pretty handy here, I don't know if a lot of sysops open FTP on
their firewalls though.
Not sure how that's any easier than logging in with Syncterm and just getting the QWK packet the normal way, and then repeating for the .REP. Seems harder, actually.
It's pretty handy here, I don't know if a lot of sysops open FTP on
their firewalls though.
I know that I absolutely would not.
I use the built-in command-line FTP client in windows, it takes a script file.
ah, ok. so thats less critical then if you just use insecure ftp locally.
So in your case it is a sysops solution only.
I use the built-in command-line FTP client in windows, it takes a
script file.
ah, ok. so thats less critical then if you just use insecure ftp locally.
So in your case it is a sysops solution only.
If you classify ftp is insecure, then use ftps instead (yes, Synchronet supports it). But really, no one in the path between the client and your BBS cares what your user password is or the contents of the QWK packets you're transferring, so secure-auth and data privacy is over-kill, but it's there to use if you want it.
You can FTP to the BBS and download a magic name "BBS.QWK" to download your new messages, and upload BBS.REP to upload your packet (change BBS > pF> to the name your BBS gives to QWK packets).
Not sure how that's any easier than logging in with Syncterm and just getting the QWK packet the normal way, and then repeating for the .REP. Seems harder, actually.
I'll play devil's advocate here - running insecure protocols on a BBS aren't that big of a deal as long as you're not sharing passwords. I still allow telnet.
Dumas Walker wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: NNTP(S) via Thunderbi
By: Gamgee to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Nov 05 2025 08:10:45
You can FTP to the BBS and download a magic name "BBS.QWK" to download your new messages, and upload BBS.REP to upload your packet (change BBS to the name your BBS gives to QWK packets).
Not sure how that's any easier than logging in with Syncterm and just getting the QWK packet the normal way, and then repeating for the .REP. Seems harder, actually.
OT from the original post but this is actually pretty easy with a shell scrit and ncftp. I log onto my BBS to get the QWK packet, but almost always upload the REP using a script. Once it is set up, it is easy
and a lot faster.
Not sure how that's any easier than logging in with Syncterm and just getting the QWK packet the normal way, and then repeating for the .REP. Seems harder, actually.
Console prompt:
$ ./getpkt
$ ./mm
$ ./putpkt
Mind you, these were scripts I wrote, one of which is one line, and the other is maybe 5 lines. No where near as difficult or time consuming.
Sure. It changes to the "DOS drive" that Multimail/SLMR would have
I am now seeing the value of this method...
Would you mind sharing the scripts? (don't need the MultiMail one).
NOTE that the lines that start with a '+' are line wrapped!
Yes, understood. The "put" direction makes good sense to me. I have a question about the "get" side though - What causes the BBS to know to
pack up all the new messages into a QWK packet though? Does just the
act of requesting <BBSID>.qwk cause that to happen?
I was thinking I'd
have to somehow "tell" the BBS to create the new QWK packet, and *then*
grab it with wget/ftp.
Yes, understood. The "put" direction makes good sense to me. I have a question about the "get" side though - What causes the BBS to know to
pack up all the new messages into a QWK packet though? Does just the
act of requesting <BBSID>.qwk cause that to happen? I was thinking I'd
have to somehow "tell" the BBS to create the new QWK packet, and *then*
grab it with wget/ftp.
Appreciate you taking the time to send/explain this! Thanks.
No, it happens on demand. The *.qwk file that appears in the FTP
directory listing is just a virtual file. A "get" (RETR) of the file actually signals the sbbs event thread to create the packet, on demand,
so there is a bit of delay before the file transfer actually starts
(which is fine).
Digital Man wrote to Gamgee <=-
Re: Re: NNTP(S) via Thunderbi
By: Gamgee to Accession on Fri Nov 07 2025 09:15 pm
Yes, understood. The "put" direction makes good sense to me. I have a question about the "get" side though - What causes the BBS to know to
pack up all the new messages into a QWK packet though? Does just the
act of requesting <BBSID>.qwk cause that to happen?
Yes, correct.
I was thinking I'd
have to somehow "tell" the BBS to create the new QWK packet, and *then*
grab it with wget/ftp.
No, it happens on demand. The *.qwk file that appears in the FTP
directory listing is just a virtual file. A "get" (RETR) of the file actually signals the sbbs event thread to create the packet, on demand,
so there is a bit of delay before the file transfer actually starts
(which is fine).
On Fri, 07 Nov 2025 11:31:18 -0500, you wrote:
NOTE that the lines that start with a '+' are line wrapped!
..and completely disregard the password, too! :D
NOTE that the lines that start with a '+' are line wrapped!
..and completely disregard the password, too! :D
Regards, Nick
too bad he didnt post the system pass, i could have fixed some stuff.
See, Gamgee? Magic! :)
Regards, Nick
Regards, Nick
too bad he didnt post the system pass, i could have fixed some stuff.
Just because *you* don't like it doesn't make it broken.
Not sure how that's any easier than logging in with Syncterm
and just getting the QWK packet the normal way, and then
repeating for the .REP. Seems harder, actually.
It's pretty handy here, I don't know if a lot of sysops open FTP on
their firewalls though.
Sure. It changes to the "DOS drive" that Multimail/SLMR would
have accessed the QWK packets in, tests for whether or not the
packet name got written out in all CAPS or all lower case, and
acts accordingly.
NOTE that the lines that start with a '+' are line wrapped!
#!/bin/bash
cd /opt/DRIVE_E/KERM231
test -e /opt/DRIVE_E/KERM231/CAPCITY2.REP
if (( $? == 0 )) ;
then
ncftpput -u "Dumas Walker" -p 448fmr -DD -E -d stdout
+ capitolcityonline.net / /opt/DRIVE_E/KERM231/CAPCITY2.REP
fi
test -e /opt/DRIVE_E/KERM231/capcity2.rep
if (( $? == 0 )) ;
then
ncftpput -u "Dumas Walker" -p 448fmr -DD -E -d stdout
+ capitolcityonline.net / /opt/DRIVE_E/KERM231/capcity2.rep
fi
cd ~
#
##END
Regards, Nick
too bad he didnt post the system pass, i could have fixed some stuff.
Just because *you* don't like it doesn't make it broken.
yeah ooookay. i just dont like broken things.
As I said, just because you don't like it doesn't make it broken.
As you are the only one whose ever complained, I would suggest the
problem is elsewhere -- and very much not mine.
OTOH, I originally had Synchronet set up so that all the message
areas were grouped by network -- which is how you like it -- and
users (plural) did complain because they couldn't find the "echoes
When a user isn't either pissed at the network admins, or banned by
then, which networks you want/need to avoid isn't an issue.
OTOH, I originally had Synchronet set up so that all the message areas were grouped by network -- which is how you like it -- and users
(plural) did complain because they couldn't find the "echoes about (subject)" that they were used to participating in on the predecessor
BBS.
predecessor BBS.
can message areas not be grouped in more than one way? i don't
recall. perhaps in a(n unpleasant) way where two areas listed in two
groups use the same files?
can message areas not be grouped in more than one way? i don't recall. perhaps in a(n unpleasant) way where two areas listed in two groups use the same files?
can message areas not be grouped in more than one way? i don't recall. perha > in a(n unpleasant) way where two areas listed in two groups use the same filThat would certainly be unpleasant. ;)
can message areas not be grouped in more than one way? i don't recall. perhaps in a(n unpleasant) way where two areas listed in two groups use t > > same files?
They actually can be, by having a sub-board with the same internal code in m > than one message group. This means you can't use the "internal code prefix"
feature, but it is doable. Some oddity with message scan config / pointers might occur also, I don't recall.
| Sysop: | Coz |
|---|---|
| Location: | Anoka, MN |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 101:14:32 |
| Calls: | 365 |
| Files: | 6,404 |
| Messages: | 236,150 |