Subj : Impulse Linux versus Impulse DOS.
To : joseph larsen
From : mark lewis
Date : Thu Mar 03 2016 10:38 pm
03 Mar 16 00:17, you wrote to me:
ml>> individual line breakdown:
ml>> 1. looking at the first line, there's a problem with the date on the
ml>> left and the number of messages on the right...
jl> The DOS version isn't Y2K comatible.
how is it not y2k compatible? does it emit or expect three digits for two digit
years?
eg: 2016 - 1900 = 116 when 16 is the expected result...
ml>> 4. the fourth line is missing the "BBS'" on the left side and the
ml>> following NOTE portion is missing the 6 bytes making up the "[cia] "
ml>> portion that is not even show on the right...
jl> The "[cia]" is for my own (stupid) uses. I just needed something to
jl> fill the space. It's basically just that, a "note" which is used
jl> throughout the board. The reason why it's different on the DOS
jl> version, is because, well, I haven't set it to something besides the
jl> default. The default is "Impulse Sysop" for the Sysop of the BBS.
so this is not a side by side comparison of the exact same message in the exact
same message base by two different flavors of the software???
ml>> 5. then there's the STAT line which doesn't even depict the same byte
ml>> values and on the right the "local" attribute is depicted with a EOF
ml>> character...
jl> I believe this is my fault. I used "pipe" codes to display the various
jl> attributes (to, from, subject, etc) of the message. And after those
jl> "pipe" codes, I used an "esc[7;1H" to anchor the message header.
jl> Somehow that ansi code at the end carried over to the "Origin" line.
jl> BTW, an EOF character is a arrow pointing to the right :)
oops... yeah... it was very late for me when i wrote that...
ml>> i'm not so sure that ansi is involved now that i look closer but
ml>> there is definitely a byte count problem somewhere... you need to
ml>> look deeper at what bytes are being seen by both flavors of the
ml>> tosser because something is not reading the bytes properly for
ml>> display or is not writing them properly to the message base... or
ml>> maybe both... that 4th line showing "[cia]" on the left and "impulse
ml>> sysop" on the right confuses me right now... one or both should
ml>> contain more or at least parts of the other... the real question is
ml>> what the original packed message in the PKT looks like and were does
ml>> that "[cia]" portion come from with... with or without the trailing
ml>> space...
jl> Again, that's for my arbitrary purposes. It has absolutely nothing to
jl> do with the message packet or bundle.
the point is that if the exact same message in the exact same message base is
depicted one way in one flavor of the software, it should be depicted pretty
much the same by another flavor of the software... if you are using two
different copies of the messages in two different versions of the message bases
then this is going to be really tough to diagnose... you really should have one
copy of the message in one message base that is read by both flavors of the
software... that way the differences between them can be easier to see...
jl> Thanks for your time in studying this problem.
you're welcome but i'm not sure that i'm really being all that much help in
this case :(
)\/(ark
Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
... Press <Ctrl-Alt-Del> now to access the pirated GIFS! ;*)
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
