Hi! All,

Over the last few days, I've been trying to find a workable replacement for my trusty binkD that had been purring away for over 4 years. It was v0.95a, and, it was suggested by a fellow unidentifiable sysop that perhaps it needed replacing. A fair thought, I agreed. So, I set about to enact that.

First I tried compiling a version which eventually identified itself internally
as 1.05-pre-5. There were no warnings or errors during configure or make. I performed a compile 'options' check (using "-vv") on the output binary, which looked pretty, and, confirmed that the executable was probably viable. A first
time run produced...

servmgr socket(): Address family not supported by protocol

And then killed itself from RAM.

Subsequently, I repeated the routine with 1.1a-94 which produced...

servmgr socket(): Address family not supported by protocol

Then killed itself.

1.0.1 produced...

servmgr socket(): Address family not supported by protocol

Then killed itself.

However, much to my surprise & relief, I found one version that needed to be released from the confines of its archive and willingly find a life of its own.
It's version 1.0a-551, which has been running confidently since ~2300 last night (AEST).

Yes, the version of Linux that binkD was compiled on is not mainstream: Puppy 4.12. Even the node's chosen version is most unusual: a special multi-user version of Puppy 4.2.1. Both puppies are running the same version level of Linux: 2.6.25.16.

I have checked the FAQ and searched through this echo (of 4000 posts) for traces of the earlier error message, but I cannot find any mention of it. The only clue to me, on thinking quietly about it, is that the last compiled binary
did _not_ mention IPv6 capability.

It does look as though I'll be stuck with version 1.0a-551 for a while. :) Does anyone else recall similar difficulties or have any thoughts?

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Paul's other Linux vBox - Maryborough, Qld, OZ (3:640/1384)

Hello Paul,

On 12 Apr 16 13:06, Paul Quinn wrote to All:

Yes, the version of Linux that binkD was compiled on is not
mainstream: Puppy 4.12. Even the node's chosen version is most
unusual: a special multi-user version of Puppy 4.2.1. Both puppies
are running the same version level of
Linux: 2.6.25.16.

I couldn't even tell you if your kernel supports IPv6, as that's fairly old now. Kernel versions are up in the 4.5.x.x range now.

I have checked the FAQ and searched through this echo (of 4000 posts)
for traces of the earlier error message, but I cannot find any mention
of it. The only clue to me, on thinking quietly about it, is that the last compiled binary did _not_ mention IPv6 capability.

Did you try compiling the latest binkd sources without IPv6 support?

It does look as though I'll be stuck with version 1.0a-551 for a
while. :) Does anyone else recall similar difficulties or have any thoughts?

That's about all I can come up with. If you didn't specify no IPv6 support when
compiling -94, and your kernel doesn't support it, it's possible that's why you
saw that error. If it indeed does have anything to do with IPv6 directly, you will probably either have to use a version of binkd without IPv6 support, or upgrade your puppies. :)

Regards,
Nick

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20160322
* Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hi! Nick,

On 04/13/2016 07:18 AM, you wrote:

Linux: 2.6.25.16.

I couldn't even tell you if your kernel supports IPv6, as that's fairly old now. Kernel versions are up in the 4.5.x.x range now.

Quite old, for sure. My bad. I'm just flogging a dev environment I took great
pains to build years back. I have a couple of USB boot sticks with later Puppies, which is its usual user environment, but I wouldn't trust any of those
to run Fido.

last compiled binary did _not_ mention IPv6 capability.

Did you try compiling the latest binkd sources without IPv6 support?

Honestly, I didn't even think of it. Thanks. I will try that after I have my daredevil suit re-pressed. ;)

to do with IPv6 directly, you will probably either have to use a version of binkd without IPv6 support, or upgrade your puppies. :)

Yes, the former is preferred. But, I promise to check for later Puppy options as well... more often.

Thank you kindly, Nick.

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Paul's other Linux vBox - Maryborough, Qld, OZ (3:640/1384)

Hello Paul,

On 13 Apr 16 08:57, Paul Quinn wrote to Nicholas Boel:

Linux: 2.6.25.16.

I couldn't even tell you if your kernel supports IPv6, as that's
fairly old now. Kernel versions are up in the 4.5.x.x range now.

Quite old, for sure. My bad. I'm just flogging a dev environment I
took great pains to build years back. I have a couple of USB boot
sticks with later Puppies, which is its usual user environment, but I wouldn't trust any of those to run Fido.

Are you talking about those specific USB boot sticks? Or newer versions of Puppy Linux in general? I would think they're a lot more secure nowadays than they were back then?

last compiled binary did _not_ mention IPv6 capability.

Did you try compiling the latest binkd sources without IPv6
support?

Honestly, I didn't even think of it. Thanks. I will try that after I have my daredevil suit re-pressed. ;)

Hah. Hopefully it's as easy as that.

Thank you kindly, Nick.

Welp, can't guarantee I'm right on any of it. But no worries! :)

Regards,
Nick

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20160322
* Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hi! Nick,

On 04/13/2016 11:31 AM, you wrote:

Quite old, for sure. My bad. I'm just flogging a dev environment I
took great pains to build years back. I have a couple of USB boot
sticks with later Puppies, which is its usual user environment, but I
wouldn't trust any of those to run Fido.

Are you talking about those specific USB boot sticks? Or newer versions
of Puppy Linux in general? I would think they're a lot more secure nowadays than they were back then?

Well, umm... both. The 'dev' PC (i.e. the only one of three with gcc & make, etc) and this ~/1384 node are installed versions of Puppy, originally booted using a USB stick (different versions). The first was originally installed to actual hardware, and then in late 2010 converted to a VirtualBox (vBox) appliance. The Fido node was created as a vBox from USB. I no longer have those USBs formatted as such.

I do have USBs formatted for later Puppies: v5.25 & v6.02(/Tahr?), each with multiple saved session settings for booting three PCs: two desktops & a netbook, for booting each for different reasons or situations (wired network versus wifi). E.g. I am using the v5.25 USB on the netbook to write this note.
I can boot any PC with either USB if the BIOS allows. I think you know this and you know about the Puppy distro, and I regret having to write this down.

This node's Puppy, v4.2.1, was developed as a one-off project by a bloke who promised that he would not be maintaining it, nor would he improve on it. Fair
enough. It's a miniature version of most OOtB Linux distros. OTOH as with any
other Puppy, the default user is root AKA the admin user in windows terms. One
big difference with this one however is the ability to run daemon jobs goober-style (bash scripts in the background), and exit/logout. The vBox & jobs keep running. Do that with any other Puppy and the machine shuts down.

I'm exhausted. Mmm... what was your question. Oh, later versions: they're all
simplistic pimped, small, fast, GUI blowjobs for the unwashed consumer masses.
I'll try to keep an eye out for any other prospective multi-user Puppy.

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Paul's other Linux vBox - Maryborough, Qld, OZ (3:640/1384)

Hello Paul,

On 13 Apr 16 17:03, Paul Quinn wrote to Nicholas Boel:

I'm exhausted. Mmm... what was your question. Oh, later versions: they're all simplistic pimped, small, fast, GUI blowjobs for the
unwashed consumer masses. I'll try to keep an eye out for any other prospective multi-user Puppy.

I thought the whole idea of Puppy Linux was to keep things minimal? Now they come with GUIs? Sigh..

Regards,
Nick

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20160322
* Origin: thePharcyde_ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)

Hi! Nick,

On 13 Apr 16 16:33, you wrote to me:

versions: they're all simplistic pimped, small, fast, GUI
blowjobs for the unwashed consumer masses. I'll try to keep an
eye out for any other prospective multi-user Puppy.

I thought the whole idea of Puppy Linux was to keep things minimal?
Now they come with GUIs? Sigh..

I think you may be thinking of Damn Small Linux (DSL)? Geeze, it's been a while since I looked at that one.

Nah, Puppy has always had a GUI. Well, at least ever since I started using it at version 2.14CE back in the mid-to-late 2000s. Their target user base is aimed at people running older hardware, with Puppy requiring only a minimum to operate on. Older versions only needed 128Mb RAM but newer versions 'like' a gigabyte. They were so GUI that most ex-Windows users don't know the difference. In fact some commercial configurations include internet cafes.

Hence, it is my OS of choice in a vBox setting: two PCs running with 256Meg RAM
and the older one using 512Meg, basically because it runs several multi-media LAN shares [including a DLNA server]. I use the same reasoning in running the two Win98Se vBox PCs as well: they only use 128Mb RAM each.

But I do have to say, the other day I had a religious experience with the latest Puppy that I have. I had a bit of spare time to lament the lack of a decent RDP/Terminal server/Remote desktop connection 'client' app in Puppy. (I
say decent, as I already have a crappy Gnome thing and a command-line incarnation but both are somewhat primitive.) So, I booted my netbook with that USB stick; went to the 'package manager' and searched for something (_anything_) better.

The package doo-hickey replied with dialogue to the effect 'not a prob, here look at this one...' and once I hit the tit, proceeded to install something from a *Ubuntu* repo. It's a real beaut! Very nearly a Windows doppleganger and way better than anything I have, and very reminiscent of something I ran on
an older Puppy years ago. Whoo!hoo! That Puppy may yet replace this Windows 8.1 that I'm "Remote desktop"-ing to my main Fido node from right now. :)

Oh, crap. I've been frothing at the mouth again. Sorry.

Cheers,
Paul.

... For a good time call 86753099 (Jenny)...
--- Paul's Win98SE VirtualBox
* Origin: Quinn's Post - Maryborough, Queensland, OZ (3:640/384)