---------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What can I do about this? I like the way 1.73 displayed these long file descriptions. I don't think the bottom example is *supposed* to be how they are displayed. What can I do about this? Also, how do I turn on file tagging as a feature, in 1.79? (Assuming that is a feature...) --- GoldED 2.50 * Origin: The Moonshadow :*: 916.343.0534 :*: Chico, CA :*: (1:119/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00025 Date: 05/04/97 From: JOHN GIANNINI Time: 02:07am \/To: TREV ROYDHOUSE (Read 0 times) Subj: Misc questions Trev - Did you get my (somewhat lengthly but detailed) message on the bug with Opus of it allowing downloads of *any* file on a BBS as long as a caller lists it as file 2, 3, or 4, on a batch file line? I didn't hear anything. A couple of quick questions. My copy of Opus says "Test Copy: Not for Distribution" when I run it, in the "log" section of my screen. Do I have the right version? It lists itself as 1.79.x Does Opus "understand" baud rates like 24000, 26400, 28800, or 33600 yet? Tonight when someone logged in at 24000, 1.79 did what 1.73 always does - when a caller went out to run Bluewave and download a packet, Bluewave estimated the packet download time as if the caller was at 2400, not 24000. Of course, the actual download time was however long the download at 24000 should have been. But the screen told the caller, in it's estimate of time, the time it would have taken to d/l the packet at 2400. In 1.73, this is because Opus "passed" Bluewave the erroneous 2400 as a baud rate. Based on the fact 1.79 does the same thing, I take it it Opus doesn't know about the above four listed baud rates. Can you confirm or deny this? Finally, when I connected with my local NEC a few minutes ago, at 33.6, I got some weird stuff in my log. Here is part of that log: === Cut === + 04 May 1:31:52 OPUS Begin, 970504 v1.79.x, Task=0 : 04 May 1:31:55 OPUS Calling 1:119/88 Madman Bbs (893-8079) # 04 May 1:32:16 OPUS Connect 33600/Arq/V34/Lapm/V42bis * 04 May 1:32:39 OPUS Madman BBS (1:119/88.0) (snip) # 04 May 1:32:40 OPUS Receiving M:\Mail\Hold\00000026.Su0 = 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS UL-Z M:\Mail\Hold\00000026.Su0 19610 : 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS Throughput = 32683 bps (10894%) * 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS Connect: 0:30 (1:119/88.0) Cost $332.37 Check out the percentage figure in parens above. 10894%? And look at what Opus estimated the cost of the call should have been! $332.37. Is my config wrong, or is it that Opus is not "understanding" the 33600 connect speed? And then this, which followed the above lines I already quoted -- ! 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS LANGERR: Can't find RY.USL : No such file or directory ! 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS LANGERR: Can't find RY.USL : No such file or directory ! 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS Can't increase ^(garbage here) DAY: No such file or directory : 04 May 1:32:46 OPUS End (2) What does the above mean? What USL does Opus want? Well, if you could help me out on these points, I would sure appreciate it. I also read O179FEAT.TXT - I see that file tagging is not implimented in 1.79. Can you let me know what the plans are for that feature in the future? Well, thanks for your patience and help, and I am sorry to be such a bother... :( --- GoldED 2.50 * Origin: The Moonshadow :*: 916.343.0534 :*: Chico, CA :*: (1:119/50) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00026 Date: 05/04/97 From: KEN PATIENCE Time: 03:30am \/To: TREV ROYDHOUSE (Read 0 times) Subj: General Hi Trev, When doing a conversion of a bare bones opus 1.73.a to the new 1.79 is there any files or programs that not be needed any longer? If so what are they? Especially in the msg areas using ommm etc? Will await your reply. --- Opus-CBCS 1.79.x * Origin: M.T.A.C. BBS Toronto, Ontario, Canada (1:2424/610.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00027 Date: 05/03/97 From: MICHAEL EPLER Time: 05:13pm \/To: DAVE BEACH (Read 0 times) Subj: Opus v1.79 released! DB> FYI, the new release rolled into here (net 1:163) this DB> morning via SDSOPUS. Great stuff. Hhhmmmm.....I'll have to keep watch then since SDSOPUS is at least working to Canada...... good news..... any feedback? --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: DelaMarPenn MicroNet -+- Newark, Delaware (1:150/115) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00028 Date: 05/04/97 From: MICHAEL EPLER Time: 07:44am \/To: STEIN-IVAR JOHNSEN (Read 0 times) Subj: New version of OPUS CBCS released! SJ> All files listed are sent via SDSOPUS.. Great...... the echo traffic seems to be moving quite well, but in our corner of fidonet the sdsopus package hasn't come through yet. Whats another day or so anyway :-) Thanks for your efforts..... --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: DelaMarPenn MicroNet -+- Newark, Delaware (1:150/115) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00029 Date: 05/04/97 From: MICHAEL EPLER Time: 07:46am \/To: BOB JUGE (Read 0 times) Subj: New version of OPUS CBCS released! BJ> They are all at http://www.juge.com/bbs/opus.3.htm Thanks Bob...... I now have a backup plan if SDSOPUS doesn't come through soon! Thanks for your help...... --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: DelaMarPenn MicroNet -+- Newark, Delaware (1:150/115) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 195 MEADOW Ref: E5B00030 Date: 05/04/97 From: RONALD BRUINTJES Time: 03:03am \/To: JOHN GIANNINI (Read 0 times) Subj: NEW OPUS Hi John, > Trev, this is probably an oft'asked question, but with 1.79, what > exactly does one do if one already has a fully operational BBS with > 1.73? Obviously, one would not want to use the files in OMAK for > that. Is Opus 1.79 a simple dropin? I tried looking for a readme > file which would explain how to upgrade existing 1.73 boards, but > didn't see it in any of the new files. Sorry, not Trev, but I hope the answer's as good. In the INSTALL.TXT file in the OMAKE package is a guide for upgrading an existing 1.73a system to 1.79. Look at page 13, it should work in most cases. And remember, keep them mirror shades and nerf bat handy... > I was also looking for a file that would be tantamount to a "new > features" list for 1.79, for experienced 1.73 sysops, but can't find > one of those, either... Would be nice to find such a list, and > brief descriptions how to impliment those features to an existing > 1.73 setup (once the 1.79 opus.exe is in place, of course.) I think the 1.79 Feature list describes most of the new features. It should be available (still?) at the sites Trev described in his message announcing the 1.79 release. There are no brief descriptions as to how to install them, although the feature list would be a good starting point for that search in the docs... (ducking)... > Also, has the userfile changed in *any* way? I have to know this As far as I can tell from the structures distributed in the Opus API of 1.73a and the structures distributed with 1.79, nothing has changed in the user file definition structure. The only things that changed were the data type keywords used in some places, and a reference to a section "New for Opus 1.20" was changed to "New for Opus 1.70"... I think the only sure way to test if the utility works with 1.79 however is to see if it still works on the user base after converting. But I'm fairly confident it will still work, as there is no mention in the INSTALL.TXT in the OMAKE archive of running a conversion utility on the user database. Cheese, # Ronald # --- FLAME v1.1 * Origin: Deimos Amsterdam 31-20-6671110,9600,XA,V21,V32,V42B,VFC (2:280/3)