Thanks for the reply, once again 

On Friday, December 15, 2017 at 1:57:52 PM UTC-8, g00r00 wrote:
> RF> again. That said, I'm using mis2, with a36, as it includes an ssh
>  RF> server...is this unsupported?
>
> Well you can do whatever you want 
>

I wasn't saying that to be flippant. A bog standard 112a36 64 bit linux package
 installed both mis and mis2, and I was using mis2 because it included ssh. I
had no idea that it was unsupported. Standard mis looks like the old mystic
server.

> But I can't support a mix and match of old versions of Mystic that may or may
> not be compatible with each other, have known issues, etc.  A36 doesn't even
> have a MIS2 so I don't know what you're actually using lol.
>
> I get that you also need a working BBS too, so I understand why you're back
to
> the old version.  But I can't address or help or resolve anything if I don't
> have the person who has the problem around to help me.   I can't send you a
new
> binary with a fix if you're not at the current release level, etc.
>

I can try to repro, I guess. It may be a minimal cost for me to rent additional
 server space temporarily while we figure this out. I'll mull that over tonight
 and more than likely will just pull the trigger on getting another box.

>  RF> DOSEMU was not complaining about security, in fact none of the
>  RF> complaints were related to security or ownership. DOSEMU complained
>  RF> about not being able to figure out character sets (cp437, auto, us, etc)
>
> I'm not super familiar with DOSEMU but if the error is that it can't read its
> configuration to get the default character set, then I would think that could
> be very possibly be related to security.

I don't remember the precise log lines, since I went nuclear and blew
everything away and just started over. I'll see if I can reproduce the issue.

>
> Most earlier copies of test-release MIS2 (before it had all of the servers
> fully functional) had an issue where in some cases it wasn't dropping its
root
> access after port binding...
>
> If you happen to build and test your BBS with that server exclusively, and
then
> switch to the "stable" version which doesn't have that issue, I think it
would
> cause all sorts of random shit to go wrong.

I never ran anything mystic related as root. I always bound to nonprivileged
ports and ran everything as my BBS user.

>
> As far as the BSY files, the FSXNET hub gets hammered and really tests this
> stuff hard.  There are times when all 16 incoming BINKP nodes are active at
> once receiving mail while there is also outbound BINKP and echomail tossing
all
> happening in harmony...
>
> My point is that if it was a general issue like BSY files not getting
deleted,
> then the entire network would halt within minutes of deploying the server.
Thee
> would also be a LOT of people reporting the same issue, and so far its only
> you.
>

I could've sworn the fsx hubs were Windows machines, but I could be wrong. Like
 I said, I'll try to repro, something got into a funky state and I'm not sure
why. *shrug*

> The only other commonality between being unable to delete a BSY file and a
> piece of software not reading its configuration values in my mind, would be
> something with security either on the admin side or the software side.

Yeah, agreed, and that's what my thought process was as well. However, root
never did anything, there is only one user account, and the directory and all
files were explicitly owned by the bbs user at all times. Dunno man. 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)