From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Stubbs Subject: Re: BBS Software Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 15:21:08 -0400 Sender: linux-hams-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <40BF7A24.9000101@utoronto.ca> References: <200405271330.25402.dl4mge@darc.de> <1085680600.31191.151.camel@kronenbourg.scs.ch> <20040527201755.GX1749@mea-ext.zmailer.org> <200405311230.37550.dl4mge@darc.de> <40BB6A68.3050700@utoronto.ca> <001001c448ee$d90de7c0$6a7ea8c0@geo> <40BF6052.30407@utoronto.ca> <000601c4499a$74cb7aa0$6a7ea8c0@wa7nwp.ampr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <000601c4499a$74cb7aa0$6a7ea8c0@wa7nwp.ampr.org> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: linux hams Bill Vodall wrote: > Hi Dave, > > >>I was looking at the Linux version of JNOS recently, I compiled and ran >>it on a Linux system that already had 3 ethernet interfaces with full >>TCP/IP, AX.25, and NET/ROM running in the Linux kernel. JNOS didn't see >>any of these interfaces, so I'm assuming it has it's own network stack >>that is different from the OS one? > > > Yes. Think of JNOS as a virtual machine. It's almost totally separate for the Linux > box. You connect the JNOS system to the Linux box with a slip link over > a pseudo tty using net2kiss and slattach. A google on those terms should give you > the necessary incancation -- if not I can forward the relevant parts from my setup. > > Ah! Well, at least that makes sense then, and my conclusions were pretty accurate. My take on the whole situation is that the JNOS on Linux is great for a person who used JNOS for many years back in the DOS days and learned it well. I have a suspicion that, for someone like myself who is a new ham but who has used Linux daily ever since 1993, I might just be better off sticking with the Linux Kernel AX.25 stuff. It probably offers comparable functionality to JNOS, but is much more familiar because it is from "my world". 73 Dave VA3BHF