[nos-bbs] JNOS and B2F - 2B or not 2B - opinions anyone ?
bobtenty at gmail.com
Fri May 8 03:40:23 EDT 2009
There is no need for B2F if Winlink/RMS is not used so I should leave it
Forwarding a lot with the standard FBB protocols.
New stuff is always OK, We are hams after all
Be aware that jnos2f4 In Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid (kernel 2.6.27-11)
consumes 95 % CPU resources during
ax25 forwarding when the start options are used and the terminal freezes
of that. (It is Ok without ax25 forwarding)
Without any startup options it runs smoothly and CPU consumption is
normal so I run jnos2f4 without any
Ubuntu 9.10 Jaunty
jnos2f4 consumes 95 % CPU resources again during forwarding this is even
without any startup options
so the trick doesn't work with jaunty. This is with kernel 2.6.27-11
It happens when there is stuff in the mqueue directory, so processing,
filtering and storing it in the areas I guess.
CPU consumption returns to normal as soon as the mqueue is empty.
Didn't test it with the new kernel 2.6.28-11 as yet as they decided to
switch off the old legacy character devices
in the supplied kernel so I have to compile a new kernel again.
Maiko Langelaar (ve4klm) wrote:
> Good day to all,
> I seem to be using the expression 'at a crossroads' alot lately, this
> time with respect to the B2F protocol - I need opinions, feelings, or
> whatever else you want to throw at this email.
> I've honestly had mixed feelings putting in the B2F code, but IF the
> bbs portion of JNOS is to *keep up* with the up and coming systems,
> the answer is pretty clear, or is it ?
> Am I just *polluting* JNOS with this *new* stuff, or is this okay ?
> QUESTION : How many of you JNOS users are actively using B2F, and who
> or what are you forwarding with ?
> QUESTION : Should I leave B2F #undef'd in the official release ?
> Unless one is using Airmail with JNOS, is there any point ?
> The B2F support is *decent*, it could be better ...
> Maiko Langelaar / VE4KLM
> nos-bbs mailing list
> nos-bbs at tapr.org
More information about the nos-bbs