Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Jun 03 2025 12:24 pm

Most of my friends are coders. All of them have the mentality that they are in it for the money. They end their shift and they don't code a single line more until the very next day. While at work, the goal is to fulfill assigned tasks within the deadline so the boss is happy - if they have to throw a horde of libraries at a problem then that is acceptable unless the project manager complains.

It's sad that all of your coder friends are only in it for the money. I actually enjoy the work, and I do have my own coding projects I work on outside of work sometimes, although there are also times when I just want to do something else after I'm off work, after doing that all day. And although I try to do a good job with my tasks, I know I'm not perfect and there may be a solution that is better than what I came up with..

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Arelor to Jcurtis on Tue Jun 03 2025 12:11 pm

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Jcurtis to nelgin on Fri May 30 2025 08:11 am

Not without tighter moderation. Most people won't put up with Troll Personality Disorder. All it takes is one to spoil the fun.

I would take six hundred MROs than a single RPGnet moderator.

The reason is simple. Trolls you can deal with. A single asshole moderator means the platform becomes worthless.

In fact I would argue that the strength of alternative nets is that it is

i'm not a troll. i'm just not a lame ass like a bunch of people here :D
to know me is to love me.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

I would argue that the strength of alternative nets is that it is not
held hostage by a single moderator or operator.

Their users are a tiny minority. Don't look strong to me.


* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Jcurtis to ARELOR on Tue Jun 03 2025 04:27 pm

I would argue that the strength of alternative nets is that it is not
held hostage by a single moderator or operator.

Their users are a tiny minority. Don't look strong to me.

I don't think that's what he meant by "strength".. What he meant that as the advantage is that they aren't held hostage by a single moderator.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

I coded on iSeries professionally.

That's amazing! Many years ago, second half of 90s, I was at the
AS/400 support center. Unfortunately I probably wasn't savvy enough
to learn COBOL on AS/400. it felt so difficult back then.
I think I have a book on COBOL on AS/400 in the garage that I have to
get back to life. I was much enjoying networking.

In the mid-90s I was an operator on a Baby 36 and, sometimes, an AS/400.
IIRC, our programmers used RPG. I learned a couple of things from them
that I have long since forgot. ;)

Just to set the expectations, I'm writing a simple app to catalog some collectables. It has a single indexed file at the moment.

Once upon a time, I considered writing a program to do something like that
with my model railroad equipment. I eventually figured out that keeping it
all in spreadsheets with gnumeric was sufficient enough. ;)

When I was considering it, I was picturing it as one application ("COB
file") and not as something complex with many programs involved. Best to
keep it simple when you can!

It wasn't what I meant, but you actually answered me in the example
you provided.
What I meant was something like:

"(A)dd, (E)dit, (D)elete, (E)xit => _"

In your example code was stored in the variable PROCESS-INDICATOR

Yes, that is what I was thinking of when I wrote that. ;)

It was! But there's so much to learn.
At the end, I just want to have a bit of fun.

You can.

One thing that some people have difficulty with when going from
another language to COBOL is that, although the code reads like English,
they are not used to needing to define all of their variables in working storage. For some reason, that just seemed logical to me.


* SLMR 2.1a * Backup corrupted: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic (H)ammer
---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Social media vs. BBSes
By: Boraxman to Jcurtis on Sun Jun 01 2025 12:24:00

Hi, Boraxman.

That and the Russians would certainly have caught the US faking it. They would have been able to tell if nothing went up.

Indeed. I first heard this argument from Ricky Gervais but it's absolutely compelling - the space race was fierce so any funny business would have been called out immediately.

BobW

---
■ Synchronet ■ >>> Magnum BBS <<< - magnumbbs.net

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Nightfox to Boraxman on Fri May 30 2025 09:20:03

Do you think the use of the virtual keyboard has significantly changes how people compose their replies? In that they just write shorter, disjointed comments?

Not really. Using abbreviated text goes as far back as the telegraph, when sending a msg. was priced by the character, so brevity was paramount. In the 90s, when PDAs with keyboards showed up, again, people would abbreviate their text, both for comfort and cost.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Social media vs. BBSes
By: Nightfox to Jcurtis on Fri May 30 2025 16:30:17

I was being sarcastic.. I tend to think it was more plausible that we did rather than faking it.

There's been a number of movies about fake Moon and Mars landings. The two I've seen were Capricorn One (1977) and Fly Me to the Moon (2024). I found both quite enjoyable.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Nightfox on Sat May 31 2025 10:24:12

I just saw a video where a jailbroken Kindle can run Linux and act as an e-ink SSH console. That's my next project. that might support a
bluetooth keyboard...

Very interesting. Got a link to the video?

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Boraxman to Digital Man on Sun Jun 01 2025 12:19:00

Though the Windows one is also electron.

Now, don't be so negative. :)

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Arelor to Boraxman on Tue Jun 03 2025 12:24:44

Back in the 80s coders were developing games using straight opcodes with no assembler nor nothing because if you used high level languages people would complain about performance.

Things were a lot different back then. Programs were much smaller, less complicated, needed fewer resources, simpler architechure. Comparing then and now is like comparing a Volkswagon Beatle to a Tesla Model S.

There were indeed assemblers back then. I used one on a PET 8032 for my 6502 Machine Language class in college back in '80-81. Also, assemblers don't deal with high-level languages, just machine language.

Today, the people paying does not give a damn, therefore the people who codes does not either.

From a coding perspective, unless the client is a data center or some such, the end-user shouldn't have to care. All that matters is they get a product that works as advertised.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Kindle Linux
By: Mortar to poindexter FORTRAN on Wed Jun 04 2025 11:21 am

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Nightfox on Sat May 31 2025 10:24:12

I just saw a video where a jailbroken Kindle can run Linux and act as an
e-ink SSH console. That's my next project. that might support a bluetooth
keyboard...

Very interesting. Got a link to the video?

https://github.com/Wint3rmute/arch-linux-on-kindle

---
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Kindle Linux
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Mortar on Wed Jun 04 2025 17:17:28

Very interesting. Got a link to the video?

https://github.com/Wint3rmute/arch-linux-on-kindle

Coolness, thanks.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

I just saw a video where a jailbroken Kindle can run Linux and act as
e-ink SSH console. That's my next project. that might support a blueto
keyboard...

That looks cool. I' did similar stuff to my trusty old Kindle Keyboard.
I didn't know that you may still root the newer ones.
I thought that Amazon blocked all the ways how to get root on those.

Rotorek

... ERROR #1078: Next time don't pay the programmer up front.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbs>>>20ForBeers.com:1337

Re: Lookatthegrouse, Lookatthegrouse!
By: Mortar to Arelor on Wed Jun 04 2025 02:52 pm

Things were a lot different back then. Programs were much smaller, less complicated, needed fewer resources, simpler architechure. Comparing then and now is like comparing a Volkswagon Beatle to a Tesla Model S.

And that is kind of my point.

My lameass Ford Orion lasted 25 years without needing spare parts other than tires and a couple of battery replacements. Tesla Model S is more advanced and whatever but I doubt it will reach such old age without needing a change of batteries more expensive that my lameass Ford ever was.

Crappy spreadsheet software in the late 90s was simpler and did what it was supposed to do. Current spreadsheet software takes a computer 200 times more powerful to run, and people is using the same spreadsheets. Yeah, I know, it has more functions and macros and whatever but the point is you used to run a spreadsheet on a toaster and now you can't.

So basically, yes, you can't compare. Old stuff used to be tight, new stuff is a disaster.

There were indeed assemblers back then. I used one on a PET 8032 for my 6502 Machine Language class in college back in '80-81. Also, assemblers don't deal with high-level languages, just machine language.

Well there were games that were coded in hex and given to the operator in order to produce the prototype. I think ant-attack is one of the most famous ones. The original notes with hex are said to still survive.

From a coding perspective, unless the client is a data center or some such, the end-user shouldn't have to care. All that matters is they get a product that works as advertised.

The customer should care because when the developer decides to pull a library with 300 dependencies instead of writing half a dozen custom funtions he is forcing the customer to buy more RAM. When the developer uses a bad library that causes excess IO he is forcing the customer to upgrade his storage or networking gear. Basically, new school developing consists on passing on the expenses of inefficiency to the customer. It works because customers suck and deserve to die.

Now try writting a crappy heavy SDN stack with ton of generic dependencies and sell it to Verizon, and tell me how it goes.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Lookatthegrouse, Lookatthegrouse!
By: Arelor to Mortar on Fri Jun 06 2025 06:00 am

The customer should care because when the developer decides to pull a library with 300 dependencies instead of writing half a dozen custom funtions he is forcing the customer to buy more RAM. When the developer uses a bad library that causes excess IO he is forcing the customer to upgrade his storage or networking gear. Basically, new school developing consists on passing on the expenses of inefficiency to the customer. It works because customers suck and deserve to die.

Generally efficiency is good, but there's an idea in software development that in general, you shouldn't re-invent the wheel. Writing all of your own functions for everything takes time to develop and test, and when you're working for someone, that time is money. In many cases, a lot of companies can justify using libraries if it can save them time and money.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: Dumas Walker to DARKNETGIRL on Tue Jun 03 2025 09:44 am

Hey there!
Apologies for the huge delays.
My life is quite bumpy :-/

Once upon a time, I considered writing a program to do something like that with my model railroad equipment. I eventually figured out that keeping it all in spreadsheets with gnumeric was sufficient enough. ;)

Well, to be honest, part of the plan was to make a comparison like
"the cobol/mainframe way" and "the unix way", i.e. using standard shell
tools to manipulate CSV. I found out sc-im as a terminal based spreadsheet.

Ages ago, in 1999, my mentor invented the noSQL term (you can search him on wikipedia). It was based on shell only, using sed awk and other standard
tools. I wrote an extended article about it on Linux Journal. Although
I can't recall much, I have a grasp on how powerful shell could be.

Plus, I recently joined the FreeBSD bandwagon. I truly admire how some
FreeBSD have mastery on shell. If you look at the CBSD management tool
source code, feels like reading C++ instead of shell. Kudos to them.

I know, a csv/ods/xls can be as powerful today, aka "the poor man's
database", but it was an excuse to learn COBOL.

Also, I am a model railway lover, although I lack the space and time
so I just had a few models of the (real) trains I used to play with
when I was a kid. My father used to work for the local railway company,
so I was not an estranger to it.

One thing that some people have difficulty with when going from
another language to COBOL is that, although the code reads like English, they are not used to needing to define all of their variables in working storage. For some reason, that just seemed logical to me.

I don't feel that as a huge issue for me. Many languages need to define
the variables at the beginning. It's just in a separate section.
I'm much more dealing now with the limits of the programming language,
as many things aren't built-in. Ex. generating a random string is not
as straightforward as I'm used to. But I get it, it was a language
that was born in the 60s, a lot of stuff just wasn't there.

Thanks!

---
■ Synchronet ■ RetroDigital BBS - rdnetbbs.com

Once upon a time, I considered writing a program to do something like tha
with my model railroad equipment. I eventually figured out that keeping i
all in spreadsheets with gnumeric was sufficient enough. ;)

Well, to be honest, part of the plan was to make a comparison like
"the cobol/mainframe way" and "the unix way", i.e. using standard shell
tools to manipulate CSV. I found out sc-im as a terminal based spreadsheet.

Fun fact... on the mainframe, I had to write several cobol programs to manipulate CSV files. We'd get data from sources that either used Excel spreadsheets or that were on PC systems that could only create CSV files.
I would upload them and then run the cobol program to parse them into fixed-length data files to be processed against our data.

I got pretty good with STRING and UNSTRING. ;)

Ages ago, in 1999, my mentor invented the noSQL term (you can search him on wikipedia).

I am curious so I will have to see if I can find that.

It was based on shell only, using sed awk and other standard
tools. I wrote an extended article about it on Linux Journal. Although
I can't recall much, I have a grasp on how powerful shell could be.

Shell can do a lot, but being able to code your own solution when you can't
get the desired results from shell is a big, big plus!

Plus, I recently joined the FreeBSD bandwagon. I truly admire how some FreeBSD have mastery on shell. If you look at the CBSD management tool
source code, feels like reading C++ instead of shell. Kudos to them.

I have tried BSD out a couple of times, usually just to test/play with on a second-hand machine, but have always stuck with linux. I would say that,
too me, it seemed too similar in some ways to motivate me to change.

I know, a csv/ods/xls can be as powerful today, aka "the poor man's database", but it was an excuse to learn COBOL.

Yeah, if you want to learn to program, or want to be creative, then using spreadsheets isn't going to scratch that itch. ;) I heard an old COBOL programmer say once that, if you can learn COBOL you can learn anything. Despite what "they've" been saying for years, you can still find a demand
for that skill in banking and government shops, especially.

Also, I am a model railway lover, although I lack the space and time
so I just had a few models of the (real) trains I used to play with
when I was a kid. My father used to work for the local railway company,
so I was not an estranger to it.

Over the years, I didn't have the space to do what I wanted, and then not
the time. I feel like I have enough of both now to get back into working
on it. Right now, I am working on a coal mine scene.

One thing that some people have difficulty with when going from
another language to COBOL is that, although the code reads like English, they are not used to needing to define all of their variables in working storage. For some reason, that just seemed logical to me.

I don't feel that as a huge issue for me. Many languages need to define
the variables at the beginning. It's just in a separate section.

I remember that from Pascal. You did have to define things but, yes, there
was no separate section. I think I prefer the separate section approach.

I'm much more dealing now with the limits of the programming language,
as many things aren't built-in. Ex. generating a random string is not
as straightforward as I'm used to. But I get it, it was a language
that was born in the 60s, a lot of stuff just wasn't there.

That, and it was meant for business computation and data manipulation. A business or government entity probably didn't have as much of a need for
random data back then so there was no reason to program for it.

For other applications, like trying to write a simple game, generate a password, etc., having the ability to generate random data is much more important than it would have been then.


* SLMR 2.1a * I'm easy to please ... as long as I get my way
---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Dumas Walker wrote to DARKNETGIRL <=-

I have tried BSD out a couple of times, usually just to test/play with
on a second-hand machine, but have always stuck with linux. I would
say that, too me, it seemed too similar in some ways to motivate me to change.

I started out in the BSDs before Linux was ready for Prime Time, first
with BSD/OS, then later running internet services (DNS, HTTP, FTP,
POP3, SMTP) on FreeBSD.

I've wanted to go back to a BSD for a more old-school desktop OS, been
tempted to look at NetBSD. I have an old 4th gen i7 desktop laying
around (4c/8t) that I hate seeing go to waste that might be a good
candidate.


--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Dumas Walker on Wed Jun 25 2025 08:11 am

I've wanted to go back to a BSD for a more old-school desktop OS, been
tempted to look at NetBSD.

If you do, I am interested to hear of it. I wonder if they still support 386 CPUs. I think linux quit those.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

If you do, I am interested to hear of it. I wonder if they still support 386 CPUs. I think linux quit those.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

I Know Debian and OpenSUSE still support 32 bit processors.
---
■ wcQWK 8.0

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:38:49 -0700
"Jcurtis" (VERT) <VERT![email protected]> wrote:

Re: Re: Cobol/gnucobol
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Dumas Walker on Wed Jun 25 2025 08:11 am

I've wanted to go back to a BSD for a more old-school desktop OS,
been tempted to look at NetBSD.

If you do, I am interested to hear of it. I wonder if they still
support 386 CPUs. I think linux quit those.

---
� Synchronet � Vertrauen � Home of Synchronet �
[vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

I used to run NetBSD a long time ago. A friend of mine was a developer
and kept nagging me to use it. I think I tried to go bleeding edge and
always ended up with some library incompatibilities. I'm sure things
are better these days. I actually quite liked it but ended with going
back to Linux with it being more the mainstream.
--
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23
---
� Synchronet � End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: NetBSD
By: Robert Wolfe to JCURTIS on Fri Jun 27 2025 09:48 am

If you do, I am interested to hear of it. I wonder if they still support 386 CPUs. I think linux quit those.

I Know Debian and OpenSUSE still support 32 bit processors.

But which ones. I think the kernel quit 386s.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Fri Jun 27 2025 09:21 am

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:38:49 -0700
I used to run NetBSD a long time ago. A friend of mine was a developer
and kept nagging me to use it. I think I tried to go bleeding edge and always ended up with some library incompatibilities. I'm sure things
are better these days. I actually quite liked it but ended with going
back to Linux with it being more the mainstream.

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to learn.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:15:44 -0700
"Jcurtis" (VERT) <VERT![email protected]> wrote:

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Fri Jun 27 2025 09:21 am

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:38:49 -0700
I used to run NetBSD a long time ago. A friend of mine was a
developer and kept nagging me to use it. I think I tried to go
bleeding edge and always ended up with some library
incompatibilities. I'm sure things are better these days. I
actually quite liked it but ended with going back to Linux with it
being more the mainstream.

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it
off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to
learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD?
I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post
pointless.
--
End Of The Line BBS - Plano, TX
telnet endofthelinebbs.com 23
---
* Synchronet * End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it
off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to
learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD?
I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post pointless.

If you don't like my style or content, you're not required to read it.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

If you do, I am interested to hear of it. I wonder if they still support
386 CPUs. I think linux quit those.

I Know Debian and OpenSUSE still support 32 bit processors.

But which ones. I think the kernel quit 386s.

For vanilla Debian, I am pretty sure you are correct. :(


* SLMR 2.1a * Not even with BOTH hands AND a flashlight!
---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it
off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to
learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD?
I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post pointless.

I read it as him paying you a compliment for "pulling it off" and learning
it.


* SLMR 2.1a * If I got the wrong number, why did you answer the phone?
---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to NELGIN on Sat Jun 28 2025 08:04:42

If you don't like my style or content, you're not required to read it.

Well, unless I know what you've written then I'm not going to know what the content is.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Dumas Walker to NELGIN on Sat Jun 28 2025 10:58:00

I read it as him paying you a compliment for "pulling it off" and learning it.

I read it as him complimenting NetBSD on running on many architectures and good for them. *shrug*

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it
off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to
learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD?
I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post pointless.

I read it as him paying you a compliment for "pulling it off" and learning it.

I wasn't talking about him at all.

I was talking about the architects of NetBSD and the difficulty of
their engineering task. That's what impresses me.

NetBSD packaging and setup is not as easy as linux. It will sink time.
Beware before embarking.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Sat Jun 28 2025 01:47 am

I used to run NetBSD a long time ago. A friend of mine was a developer and
kept nagging me to use it. I think I tried to go bleeding edge and always
ended up with some library incompatibilities.

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it off is
impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD? I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post pointless.

Eh? Sounds to me like he was paying you a compliment ("That's no easy trick. Pulling it off is impressive").

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Sat Jun 28 2025 01:47 am

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it
off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to
learn.

Why are you telling me what I already know? Didn't I say I ran NetBSD?
I have a pretty good grasp on what it will run on. I find this post pointless.

SOMEONE HAS THEIR PERIOD!

---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Sat Jun 28 2025 01:47:34

Why are you telling me what I already know?...

Whoa, dude. Go have a Snickers. ;)

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Just for the record, here is the list of supported platforms for NetBSD.
It's pretty amazing, I've seen NetBSD running on old MIPS IBM Workpads
and other Windows CE devices, and running nicely. Sun 3s run it well,
too...


Port CPU Machines Latest Release
amd64 x86_64 64-bit x86-family machines 10.1
evbarm arm ARM evaluation boards 10.1
evbmips mips MIPS-based evaluation boards 10.1
evbppc powerpc PowerPC-based evaluation boards 10.1
hpcarm arm StrongARM based Windows CE PDA machines 10.1
i386 i386 32-bit x86-family generic machines 10.1
sparc64 sparc Sun UltraSPARC (64-bit) 10.1
xen i386, x86_64 Xen Virtual Machine Monitor 10.1
acorn32 arm Acorn RiscPC/A7000/NC and compatibles 10.1
algor mips Algorithmics MIPS evaluation boards 10.1
alpha alpha Digital Alpha (64-bit) 10.1
amiga m68k Commodore Amiga, MacroSystem DraCo 10.1
amigappc powerpc PowerPC-based Amiga boards 10.1
arc mips Advanced RISC Computing spec 10.1
atari m68k Atari TT030, Falcon, Hades 10.1
bebox powerpc Be Inc's BeBox 10.1
cats arm Chalice Technology's Strong Arm evaluation board
10.1
cesfic m68k CES's FIC8234 VME processor board 10.1
cobalt mips Cobalt Networks' Microservers 10.1
dreamcast sh3 Sega Dreamcast game console 10.1
emips mips Machines based on "Extensible MIPS" 10.1
epoc32 arm 32bit PSION EPOC PDA none
evbsh3 sh3 Renesas (Hitachi) Super-H SH3 and SH4 CPUs 10.1 ews4800mips mips NEC's MIPS based EWS4800 workstations 10.1
hp300 m68k Hewlett-Packard 9000/300 and 400 series 10.1
hppa hppa Hewlett-Packard 9000 PA-RISC machines 10.1
hpcmips mips MIPS based Windows CE PDA machines 10.1
hpcsh sh3 Renesas (Hitachi) SH3 and SH4 based Windows CE PDA
machines 10.1
ia64 itanium Itanium family of processors none
ibmnws powerpc IBM Network Station Series 1000 10.1
iyonix arm Iyonix ARM pc 10.1
landisk sh3 SH4 based NAS appliances by I-O DATA 10.1
luna68k m68k OMRON Tateisi Electronics' LUNA series 10.1
mac68k m68k Apple Macintosh 10.1
macppc powerpc Apple Power Macintosh and clones 10.1
mipsco mips Mips family of workstations and servers 10.1
mmeye sh3 Brains' mmEye Multi Media Server 10.1
mvme68k m68k Motorola MVME 68k SBCs 10.1
mvmeppc powerpc Motorola MVME PowerPC SBCs 10.1
netwinder arm StrongARM based NetWinder machines 10.1
news68k m68k Sony's m68k based "NET WORK STATION" series 10.1
newsmips mips Sony's MIPS based "NET WORK STATION" series
10.1
next68k m68k NeXT 68k 'black' hardware 10.1
ofppc powerpc Generic OpenFirmware compliant PowerPC machines 10.1
pmax mips Digital MIPS-based DECstations and DECsystems 10.1
prep powerpc PReP (PowerPC Reference Platform) and CHRP machines
10.1
rs6000 powerpc MCA-based IBM RS/6000 workstations 10.1
sandpoint powerpc Motorola Sandpoint reference platform 10.1
sbmips mips Broadcom SiByte evaluation boards 10.1
sgimips mips Silicon Graphics' MIPS-based workstations 10.1
shark arm Digital DNARD ("shark") 10.1
sparc sparc Sun SPARC (32-bit) 10.1
sun2 m68k Sun 2 10.1
sun3 m68k Sun 3 and 3x 10.1
vax vax Digital VAX 10.1
x68k m68k Sharp X680x0 series 10.1
zaurus arm Sharp C7x0/C860/C1000/C3x00 series PDA 10.1

--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

I read it as him paying you a compliment for "pulling it off" and learning it.

I read it as him complimenting NetBSD on running on many architectures and goo
for them. *shrug*

Turns out, you were correct. :D


* SLMR 2.1a * Go softly....it's dark out there
---
■ Synchronet ■ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Nightfox to nelgin on Sat Jun 28 2025 12:35:34

Eh? Sounds to me like he was paying you a compliment ("That's no easy trick. Pulling it off is impressive").

Installing NetBSD on a PC is like installing Linux on a PC. It's hardly a feat of magnificence. Now if I had tried to install it on some strange technology like the Dreamcast, then maybe.

---
■ Synchronet ■ End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com

Installing NetBSD on a PC is like installing Linux on a PC.

NetBSD package management takes time to learn. It's not the same as
linux. And you need to compile a custom kernel. The default kernel is
bloated with features many users don't need. Editing the kernel config
often results in a failed build because you removed some essential
dependency. It takes time, trial, and error to get it right.

It's not as easy as linux, if you want to do much work with it. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Mortar to nelgin on Sun Jun 29 2025 01:05 pm

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Sat Jun 28 2025 01:47:34

Why are you telling me what I already know?...

Whoa, dude. Go have a Snickers. ;)

he might have had a snickers but put it in the wrong port.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to NELGIN on Sun Jun 29 2025 06:09 pm

Installing NetBSD on a PC is like installing Linux on a PC.

NetBSD package management takes time to learn. It's not the same as
linux. And you need to compile a custom kernel. The default kernel is bloated with features many users don't need. Editing the kernel config often results in a failed build because you removed some essential dependency. It takes time, trial, and error to get it right.

I agree about the package managment but I installed it and i was up and going pretty quick. the install is quite refreshing compared to today's linux installs which are annoying and bloated.

i didnt need to edit the kernel config. it was pretty user friendly, people don't have to spend time figuring out shit like years ago.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

I did, to make it fit in a small memory system. Do you know what your
kernel memory size is?

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Jcurtis wrote to MRO <=-

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

I did, to make it fit in a small memory system. Do you know what your kernel memory size is?

So, you're using it in a specialized/niche use case. As he said,
editing the kernel config is NOT "required", as you stated. On modern, "normal" hardware, who gives a shit what the "kernel memory size" is?
Even on "legacy/retro" hardware... it works fine, without needing to
compile a custom kernel.



... Daddy, what does "now formatting drive C:" mean?
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

On modern, "normal" hardware, who gives a shit what the "kernel
memory size" is?

People who know what they're doing. I wonder about this crowd.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to MRO on Mon Jun 30 2025 04:42 am

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

I did, to make it fit in a small memory system. Do you know what your kernel memory size is?

---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: MRO to Jcurtis on Mon Jun 30 2025 11:37 am

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to MRO on Mon Jun 30 2025 04:42 am

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

okay did you intentionally edit my quote to make it say something else?
i said:
"i didnt need to edit the kernel config. it was pretty user friendly, people don't have to spend time figuring out shit like years ago. "

I did, to make it fit in a small memory system. Do you know what
your kernel memory size is?

dude i just installed in on vmware.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: MRO to Jcurtis on Mon Jun 30 2025 11:39 am

did you intentionally edit my quote to make it say something else?

No. I didn't add or change any words. I cut unneeded words. That's trimming, not editing.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Hey Jcurtis!

On Sun, 29 Jun 2025 18:09:02 -0700, you wrote:

NetBSD package management takes time to learn. It's not the same as
linux. And you need to compile a custom kernel. The default kernel is bloated with features many users don't need. Editing the kernel config
often results in a failed build because you removed some essential dependency. It takes time, trial, and error to get it right.

The only time you should really need to compile a custom kernel these days, is if the hardware can't handle it. And yes, NetBSD does support a lot of old and slow stuff, so in many of those cases it may be necessary.

However, most modern Linux distros likely use a similar 'default' kernel that is bloated with features many users don't need. Today's (and even a decade ago's) hardware will most likely handle it just fine.

It's not as easy as linux, if you want to do much work with it. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

How much work is one willing to do with NetBSD? Most use cases I've heard of, or seen, is using it to setup a router/firewall, or run server related stuff (which FreeBSD is probably even a better candidate these days).

While it may have it's uses, setting up some kind of cool desktop with NetBSD is only one's own willingness for self torture (much like Gentoo, lol). Some people enjoy punishing themselves, and would rather spend more time tinkering/configuring/compiling than actually /using/ their OS, I suppose. ;)

Regards,
Nick

... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20250409
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (723:1/1)
� Synchronet � _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin)

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to MRO on Mon Jun 30 2025 02:09 pm

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: MRO to Jcurtis on Mon Jun 30 2025 11:39 am

did you intentionally edit my quote to make it say something else?

No. I didn't add or change any words. I cut unneeded words. That's trimming, not editing.

yeah but you entirely changed my sentence to make it say something else.
why even do that?

you changed it to:

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: MRO to Jcurtis on Mon Jun 30 2025 08:34 pm

No. I didn't add or change any words. I cut unneeded words. That's trimming, not editing.

yeah but you entirely changed my sentence to make it say something else.
why even do that?

you changed it to:

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

It seemed harmless to me. Sorry for any offense.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Jcurtis wrote to MRO <=-

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: MRO to Jcurtis on Mon Jun 30 2025 08:34 pm

No. I didn't add or change any words. I cut unneeded words. That's trimming, not editing.

yeah but you entirely changed my sentence to make it say something else.
why even do that?

you changed it to:

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

It seemed harmless to me. Sorry for any offense.

Yeah, bullshit. You say above that you "trimmed" it but didn't edit it. Then, when presented with the FACT that you *DID* actually edit it, you
say it seemed harmless. That's bullshit and you're a complete fucking douchebag for doing it.

You "trimmed" my post in this same thread so severely that it entirely
changed the intended meaning of what I wrote. You don't have the right
to edit somebody's words and make it appear as a "quote", just to suit
your agenda/point, you little fuck.

Everyone please note this asshole's methods and stop responding to this trolling little prick.



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
■ Synchronet ■ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: Jcurtis to MRO on Mon Jun 30 2025 07:08 pm

you changed it to:

i didnt need to edit the kernel config ... like years ago

It seemed harmless to me. Sorry for any offense.

you're editing people's text to make it something else.
just stay out of it or dont quote it at all.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

you're editing people's text to make it something else.

No, trimming is not editing. People already saw the full text in the
original message. Anyone who wants to review it can easily find it. No
need to repeat the full text. It's a waste of time and space.

just stay out of it or dont quote it at all.

If you don't like my style or content, you're not required to read it.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

good to put thought into the overall design, or else you could end up w code that's hard to maintain.

Most software design is trash. That's why normal people don't like computers. ---

Good point! I think you're right about that.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/02/26 (Linux/64)
* Origin: alcoholidaybbs.com / Est. 1995 / Columbia, SC

Most software design is trash. That's why normal people don't like computers.

Good point! I think you're right about that.

I never met many normal people on a BBS. Mostly technical. Programmers
and engineers are not normal.

* SLMR 2.1a *
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 2025-06-27, Jcurtis <[email protected]> wrote:

Re: Re: NetBSD
By: nelgin to All on Fri Jun 27 2025 09:21 am

On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 09:38:49 -0700
I used to run NetBSD a long time ago. A friend of mine was a developer
and kept nagging me to use it. I think I tried to go bleeding edge and always ended up with some library incompatibilities. I'm sure things
are better these days. I actually quite liked it but ended with going
back to Linux with it being more the mainstream.

NetBSD runs on more architectures. That's no easy trick. Pulling it off is impressive. Using NetBSD takes time. It's another world to learn.

NetBSD it's a bit difficult to set, but OpenBSD it's a breeze to configure.
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Most software design is trash. That's why normal people don't like computers.

How long has it been since somebody called you an idiot?

but there is some point in top above. Saying _most_ may hurt people closer to the profession and normal is extremely subjective but I continually find that software designers and software engineers are two different things and the latter combined with expectations that they can deliver first is often first mistake when shipping the product.

-h1

... -=Lordz of BooM are back=-

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2024/05/29 (Linux/64)
* Origin: 2o fOr beeRS bbs>>>20ForBeers.com:1337