• htick "issue"

    From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to ALL on Thu Apr 23 10:10:49 2026
    Is there a way to get htick to ignore these issues and go ahead and process
    the files?

    7 00:20:01 Processing Tic-File /home/bbs/fido/inbound/0urbuzff.tic
    7 00:20:01 File "db4s.zip": size: 2751653, area: DBRIDGE, from: 1:154/10, orig:
    7 00:20:01 Size of file '/home/bbs/fido/inbound/db4s.zip' differs with TIC. I t
    A 00:20:01 Can't check size of file "db4s.zip": No such file or directory. Skip
    A 00:20:01 Can't check size of file "db4s.zip.1": No such file or directory. Sk
    A 00:20:01 Can't check size of file "db4s.zip.2": No such file or directory. Sk
    7 00:20:01 Wrong CRC for file "db4s.zip", skipping this file (in tic:ef043450,


    I tried adding the '-b' parameter but that does not address issues such as these.

    Mike


    * SLMR 2.1a * I don't NEED Robocomm! ... I'm up at 4:00 am
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Thu Apr 23 17:30:51 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Thu, Apr 23 2026 10:10:49 -0500, you wrote:

    Is there a way to get htick to ignore these issues and go ahead and
    process the files?

    7 00:20:01 Processing Tic-File /home/bbs/fido/inbound/0urbuzff.tic
    7 00:20:01 File "db4s.zip": size: 2751653, area: DBRIDGE, from:
    1:154/10, orig: 7 00:20:01 Size of file '/home/bbs/fido/inbound/
    db4s.zip' differs with TIC. I t A 00:20:01 Can't check size of file "db4s.zip": No such file or directory. Skip A 00:20:01 Can't check
    size of file "db4s.zip.1": No such file or directory. Sk A 00:20:01
    Can't check size of file "db4s.zip.2": No such file or directory. Sk
    7 00:20:01 Wrong CRC for file "db4s.zip", skipping this file (in tic:ef043450,

    I tried adding the '-b' parameter but that does not address issues> such as these.

    In the last line, it says "in tic: ef043450". This doesn't seem to match the original tic that came from my system (0urbuzff.tic), which is most likely why there was a CRC issue.

    Are you getting this file and/or fileecho from multiple hubs? It seems you have 3 of the same file that overwrote each other, and it looks like you (or htick) deleted all three of them at some point?

    Almost seems like before the original .tic was processed, you got another tic and the same db4s.zip from another system, and then possibly even another one after that.

    If you still have a file named "db4s.zip", that may not be the one that came with the .tic file that is being processed. If you do have multiple file hubs for the same fileechos, I'd recommend not doing that. While it works with echomail (because of dupe checking), I'm not so sure it works very well with files.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm, because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Kai Richter@2:240/77 to Mike Powell on Fri Apr 24 12:44:02 2026
    Hello Mike!

    23 Apr 26, Mike Powell wrote to ALL:

    Is there a way to get htick to ignore these issues and go ahead and process the files?

    ? Doesn't htick do that already?

    7 00:20:01 Size of file '/home/bbs/fido/inbound/db4s.zip' differs
    Wrong CRC for file "db4s.zip", skipping this file (in tic:ef043450,

    CRC means the file does not match the TIC. This is a serious issue and htick does ignore it by skipping.

    That way the sysop can identify the reason for the issue and solve it.

    My workaround for known files is a rename from "file" to "file-timestamp".

    According to the file extensions .1 and .2 you have three versions of that file. This .1 .2 renaming is done by the mailer. If the original "file" is renamed at least the next tic with "file" will match.

    That way the sysop can decide what to do with "file-timestamp" later.

    Regards

    Kai

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7
    * Origin: Monobox (2:240/77)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to KAI RICHTER on Fri Apr 24 10:50:45 2026
    CRC means the file does not match the TIC. This is a serious issue and htick does ignore it by skipping.

    That way the sysop can identify the reason for the issue and solve it.

    I didn't hatch it so I wouldn't know what the issue is.

    My workaround for known files is a rename from "file" to "file-timestamp".

    According to the file extensions .1 and .2 you have three versions of that file. This .1 .2 renaming is done by the mailer. If the original "file" is renamed at least the next tic with "file" will match.

    That way the sysop can decide what to do with "file-timestamp" later.

    Sounds like the best workaround is to delete them so they stop polluting my logs.


    * SLMR 2.1a * IBM = Institute of Black Magic
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to NICK BOEL on Fri Apr 24 10:50:45 2026
    If you still have a file named "db4s.zip", that may not be the one that came with the .tic file that is being processed. If you do have multiple file hubs for the same fileechos, I'd recommend not doing that. While it works with echomail (because of dupe checking), I'm not so sure it works very well with files.

    To the best of my knowledge, I do not have multiple feeds for file echoes
    but will check.

    Since the CRC/file sizes don't seem to match on any of them, and there is apparently no way to force htick to process them, I am going to
    delete them.


    * SLMR 2.1a * Taglines: the toilet-stall walls of BBSdom.
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to Nick Boel on Fri Apr 24 11:11:03 2026

    In the last line, it says "in tic: ef043450". This doesn't seem to match the original tic that came from my system (0urbuzff.tic), which is most likely why there was a CRC issue.

    Are you getting this file and/or fileecho from multiple hubs? It seems you have 3 of the same file that overwrote each other, and it looks like you (or htick) deleted all three of them at some point?

    After further examination, all tics involved in this issue originate from 1:154/10 (see below).

    Almost seems like before the original .tic was processed, you got another tic and the same db4s.zip from another system, and then possibly even another one after that.

    That is happening because the replaces doesn't match the file name case and the files are always named the same - no version number - so there are three versions with three different dates.

    If you still have a file named "db4s.zip", that may not be the one that came with the .tic file that is being processed. If you do have multiple file hubs for the same fileechos, I'd recommend not doing that. While it works with echomail (because of dupe checking), I'm not so sure it works very well with files.

    Here is the issue, as best as I can tell:

    Created by HTick, written by Gabriel Plutzar
    File db4s.zip
    Area DBRIDGE
    Areadesc DB: D'Bridge Software Releases
    Desc D'Bridge 4 Standard Edition
    LDesc D'Bridge 4 Standard Edition
    Replaces DB4S.ZIP
    From 1:154/10

    The "File" value, and the dataset name received, are in lower case.
    The 'Replaces' is in upper.

    Because the files are always named the same and, at least the last three times, have landed here with lower case names, they are not getting replaced. I am guessing that htick has started having difficulty telling which is which.

    Not sure why the first one didn't get processed. Based on the datestamp, it landed here before I replaced synchronet's tic processing -- which seemed unreliable -- with htick.

    I am guessing tickit failed to process it, left it in the inbound, and eventually a new same-named file landed. Since the Replaces don't match, the errors started.

    Now, if the case in the dataset name of the 'Replaces' isn't relevant, then who knows why htick isn't just replacing it. ;) I would guess it is a true filesise/CRC error.

    Mike
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Mike Powell on Fri Apr 24 18:15:28 2026

    On 2026 Apr 24 10:50:44, you wrote to NICK BOEL:

    If you still have a file named "db4s.zip", that may not be the one that
    came with the .tic file that is being processed. If you do have multiple
    file hubs for the same fileechos, I'd recommend not doing that. While it
    works with echomail (because of dupe checking), I'm not so sure it works
    very well with files.

    To the best of my knowledge, I do not have multiple feeds for file echoes but will check.

    check the PATH in those tics and you'll likely find the multiple paths fairly easily... i have seen the same here with the FIDONEWS FDN since maybe 2019 or 2020...

    )\/(ark

    "The soul of a small kitten in the body of a mighty dragon. Look on my majesty, ye mighty, and despair! Or bring me catnip. Your choice. Oooh, a shiny thing!"
    ... Cats teach us how to land on our feet
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Fri Apr 24 17:54:07 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Fri, Apr 24 2026 10:50:45 -0500, you wrote:

    To the best of my knowledge, I do not have multiple feeds for file
    echoes but will check.

    Ok. Somehow you ended up with multiple copies.

    Since the CRC/file sizes don't seem to match on any of them, and
    there is apparently no way to force htick to process them, I am
    going to delete them.

    Good idea. Once you clear them, if you want a new copy of the file, and if I remember right, you can send a netmail to my filefix with:

    %resend db4s.zip DBRIDGE

    Or something like that.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm, because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Fri Apr 24 20:37:29 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Fri, Apr 24 2026 11:11:03 -0500, you wrote:

    After further examination, all tics involved in this issue originate
    from 1:154/10 (see below).

    Then I'm guessing multiple files were sent to me in a short(er) period.

    That is happening because the replaces doesn't match the file name
    case and the files are always named the same - no version number -
    so there are three versions with three different dates.

    Correct. I was changing incoming files to lowercase with binkd, for years without issue. See below.

    Here is the issue, as best as I can tell:

    Created by HTick, written by Gabriel Plutzar File db4s.zip Area
    DBRIDGE Areadesc DB: D'Bridge Software Releases Desc D'Bridge 4
    Standard Edition LDesc D'Bridge 4 Standard Edition Replaces DB4S.ZIP
    From 1:154/10

    The "File" value, and the dataset name received, are in lower case.
    The 'Replaces' is in upper.

    Yessir, and understood. Uppercase filenames are stupid these days. 'Nuff said. ;)

    Because the files are always named the same and, at least the last
    three times, have landed here with lower case names, they are not
    getting replaced. I am guessing that htick has started having
    difficulty telling which is which.

    Typically, the first "db4s.zip" that would arrive on your system would use the REPLACES tag and replace your upper case one. From then on out, it would overwrite the latest lowercase one. This shouldn't be an issue if the first one was processed before the others arrived.

    Not sure why the first one didn't get processed. Based on the
    datestamp, it landed here before I replaced synchronet's tic
    processing -- which seemed unreliable -- with htick.

    It was probably just set to run at certain intervals, rather than immediately when the .tic is received. There have been a few D'Bridge releases recently. That's all I can think of.

    I am guessing tickit failed to process it, left it in the inbound,
    and eventually a new same-named file landed. Since the Replaces
    don't match, the errors started.

    I don't think the REPLACES tag causes errors. It would just look for a DB4S.ZIP and replace it, if it's not there, it would process it and your directory would then maybe include two files, one uppercase and the other lowercase.

    Granted, I can't say how tickit works, so maybe it's different.

    Now, if the case in the dataset name of the 'Replaces' isn't
    relevant, then who knows why htick isn't just replacing it. ;) I
    would guess it is a true filesise/CRC error.

    What I saw in your log was that it wasn't using the proper .tic file for the "db4s.zip" that was in your inbound. For example, the original db4s.zip was still there, the next two that arrived were renamed. The latest .tic file (the one that came with the file that was renamed to "db4s.zip.2" to arrive was being used on the old file, so that's where the CRC/filesize errors were occurring.

    It's all good. As I mentioned in the previous message, delete all of them and the .tic files, grab it again with the filefix command I gave you. We'll see what happens next release.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm, because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Kai Richter@2:240/77 to Mike Powell on Sat Apr 25 12:27:08 2026
    Hello Mike!

    24 Apr 26, Mike Powell wrote to NICK BOEL:

    To the best of my knowledge, I do not have multiple feeds for file
    echoes but will check.

    Are the files being transfered without interruption? Wasn't there a mailer config option how to handle incompleted transfers?

    Since the CRC/file sizes don't seem to match on any of them,

    It could be a real CRC/badblock problem on your or the sender system.

    Regards

    Kai

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7
    * Origin: Monobox (2:240/77)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/10 to Kai Richter on Sat Apr 25 07:30:14 2026
    Hey Kai!

    On Sat, 25 Apr 2026 12:27:08 , you wrote:

    It could be a real CRC/badblock problem on your or the sender system.

    3 of the same file (2 renamed), with 3 .tic files. The latest .tic file that was being processed was not sent with the original (not renamed) file.

    There are no bad blocks. The original file's filesize changed, and the .tic that was being processed reflected that.

    Nothing crazy or fancy. The first (of three) files just wasn't processed fast enough, before the second one showed up and ruined the party. ;)

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20260304
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to NICK BOEL on Sat Apr 25 10:24:00 2026
    Typically, the first "db4s.zip" that would arrive on your system would use the
    REPLACES tag and replace your upper case one. From then on out, it would overwrite the latest lowercase one. This shouldn't be an issue if the first on
    was processed before the others arrived.

    But then when the next db4s.zip arrives, there is no uppercase one to
    replace. It looks to me like it won't replace the lowercase
    dataset name, leaving the old (lowercase) one out there to cause a mismatch later.

    I don't think the REPLACES tag causes errors. It would just look for a DB4S.ZI
    and replace it, if it's not there, it would process it and your directory woul
    then maybe include two files, one uppercase and the other lowercase.

    I think it might cause an issue when the file already exists and it cannot replace it because the filename doesn't match. It then eventually tries to match a new tic with the older dataset, which is what happened here.

    What I saw in your log was that it wasn't using the proper .tic file for the "db4s.zip" that was in your inbound. For example, the original db4s.zip was still there, the next two that arrived were renamed. The latest .tic file (the
    one that came with the file that was renamed to "db4s.zip.2" to arrive was being used on the old file, so that's where the CRC/filesize errors were occurring.

    That would make sense, since it was trying to match to "db4s.zip" and the
    one it was finding was the old one from September.

    It's all good. As I mentioned in the previous message, delete all of them and the .tic files, grab it again with the filefix command I gave you. We'll see what happens next release.

    I got it processed "by hand." ;) If that echo continues causing issues, I will just drop it.


    * SLMR 2.1a * Mason-Dixon Line n. Separates y'all from youse guys
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to NICK BOEL on Sat Apr 25 10:24:00 2026
    3 of the same file (2 renamed), with 3 .tic files. The latest .tic file that was being processed was not sent with the original (not renamed) file.

    No, it was actually three of the same named file (x2 as it comes with a companion - total 6) and only one tic file (x2, one for each - total 2).
    The tics were received with the latest installment.

    There are no bad blocks. The original file's filesize changed, and the .tic that was being processed reflected that.

    Nothing crazy or fancy. The first (of three) files just wasn't processed fast enough, before the second one showed up and ruined the party. ;)

    The first of three sets landed in September when I was still using tickit.
    The second in March, after I had switched to htick, and the third this month.
    I check that log once a day so it didn't start throwing any errors into the
    log until the third set was recently received.

    I forget what schedule tickit ran on (at least once a day), but htick runs every 10 minutes! ;)

    I very much suspect the issue triggered because the REPLACES doesn't match, which is causing files of the same name (with a digit added on the end) to
    pile up and eventually this causes an issue.


    * SLMR 2.1a * PRESS To test. <click> RELEASE to detonate.
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Sun Apr 26 19:05:53 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Sat Apr 25 2026 , you wrote:

    But then when the next db4s.zip arrives, there is no uppercase one to replace. It looks to me like it won't replace the lowercase
    dataset name, leaving the old (lowercase) one out there to cause a
    mismatch later.

    If there isn't an uppercase one to replace (in the actual fileecho, not your inbound), it will do nothing. It won't crash or stop anything else from happening, or anything like that.

    The fact that you had multiple copies in your inbound directory, means your processor wasn't actually processing anything.

    I think it might cause an issue when the file already exists and it
    cannot replace it because the filename doesn't match. It then
    eventually tries to match a new tic with the older dataset, which is
    what happened here.

    No. It doesn't cause an issue in that regard. You're referring to the inbound directory. The "REPLACES" tag works for the actual fileecho the file gets processed to, not your inbound.

    Either way, if there is no file in that directory to replace, it will continue to process the .tic and replace nothing.

    That would make sense, since it was trying to match to "db4s.zip" and
    the one it was finding was the old one from September.

    It happens sometimes. You can safely delete them along with any tic files related to them, and it should be fine.

    I got it processed "by hand." ;) If that echo continues causing
    issues, I will just drop it.

    No need. Just make sure your processor runs when the file arrives (even when that specific session is over, is fine). But don't wait a week or two to run htick to process, or you will probably have a few other overwritten files.

    If you made the switch from tickit to htick, there may have been a timeframe during that time you weren't processing as they came in, or even tickit was configured to process at intervals, rather than immediately when the .tic is received. Either way, no need to be alarmed or anything. It can happen, and it can get cleaned up and things go back to normal operation.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Sun Apr 26 19:12:51 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Sat Apr 25 2026 , you wrote:

    No, it was actually three of the same named file (x2 as it comes with a companion - total 6) and only one tic file (x2, one for each - total 2).
    The tics were received with the latest installment.

    I'm not arguing symantics. What I said still holds true.

    The first of three sets landed in September when I was still using
    tickit. The second in March, after I had switched to htick, and the
    third this month. I check that log once a day so it didn't start
    throwing any errors into the log until the third set was recently received.

    So you haven't cleared bad packets, or bad/old tics from your inbound since at least September? This is probably not a binkd or tic processor issue, at this point.

    I forget what schedule tickit ran on (at least once a day), but htick
    runs every 10 minutes! ;)

    Running your tic processor once a day (or even every 10 minutes) is exactly why this happened. It doesn't happen very often, but it happens nonetheless. htick (or even tickit) should run as soon as a tic file is received, if you want to avoid this in the future.

    Basically, and specifically with this exact scenario; if Nick were to hatch a D'Bridge release, then realize he made a typo and re-hatch it 5 minutes later, both of your methods of processing above would fail, as you would have one "db4s.zip", and when the second one comes in, it would be "db4s.zip.1", with two .tic files in your inbound. If the wrong tic file gets processed, it will cause a CRC/filesize error and will fail.

    Not sure what mailer you're using, but with binkd I use this in the config:

    exec "/home/user/fido/scripts/htick.sh" *.[Tt][Ii][Cc]

    If you're using binkit or whatever it's called, you might want to look into how to invoke the tic processor upon receipt of a tic file, or you will probably eventually run into this issue again in the future.

    I very much suspect the issue triggered because the REPLACES doesn't
    match, which is causing files of the same name (with a digit added on
    the end) to pile up and eventually this causes an issue.

    Again, as I said before, the REPLACES command does not affect what is in your INBOUND directory. It is for the fileecho. If you store db4s.zip in a directory called "/home/user/files/dbridge" once the file is processed - THAT is where it will replace the file.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to NICK BOEL on Mon Apr 27 10:08:54 2026
    Running your tic processor once a day (or even every 10 minutes) is exactly wh
    this happened. It doesn't happen very often, but it happens nonetheless. htick
    (or even tickit) should run as soon as a tic file is received, if you want to avoid this in the future.

    No it is not exactly why. Dates that a month or more apart are > 10 minutes apart.

    So you haven't cleared bad packets, or bad/old tics from your inbound since at
    least September? This is probably not a binkd or tic processor issue, at this point.

    If the issue isn't logged (which is wasn't until this time) how would I
    know to clear them from the inbound? Now that I am running htick and errors actually show up, I have.

    My initial question was "is there a way to tell htick to go ahead and
    process the files" when it gets an error that, to me, isn't important.

    The answer is "no" so the question is answered.

    The issue with not logging... or why the earlier TIC files were deleted while the files were left unprocessed... is probably a tickit issue so I think it is off topic here. tickit doesn't run here any more so it is also irrelevant.

    I still maintain that the REPLACES not matching the case of the files
    received is eventually going to cause a problem... whether it just be
    duplicate files or something else remains to be seen. I will worry about
    it when it happens again. I don't think that htick is the cause of that, either, as I doubt it changes file cases on its own, so it is probably also
    off topic here.


    * SLMR 2.1a * Strip mining prevents forest fires.
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Mon Apr 27 11:45:21 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Mon Apr 27 2026 , you wrote:

    I still maintain that the REPLACES not matching the case of the files received is eventually going to cause a problem... whether it just be duplicate files or something else remains to be seen. I will worry
    about it when it happens again. I don't think that htick is the cause
    of that, either, as I doubt it changes file cases on its own, so it is probably also off topic here.

    With quite a bit of experience using htick, what I'm trying to tell you is that htick itself will not do anything if whatever is in the REPLACES field is not there or found. It might log the fact that the filename in that field isn't there, but it will still continue to process the file and put it where it belongs.

    The only "problem" it may cause, is you might end up with a few files in a directory: possibly one uppercase, one lowercase, and maybe even one mixed case, depending on what your uplink sends you. As long as the tic file matches the file it came with, it will be processed. If the REPLACES command has an uppercase or mixed case filename, and you have a lowercase file of the same in your 'fileecho' directory (again, /not/ inbound), it will not replace it.

    If you know that your uplink will always send you lowercase files, once those are in the directory they're supposed to be in, you can safely remove the uppercase or mixed case ones (ie. manual cleanup, as I don't think any tic processor does that for you). If you were to ever switch hubs, you may have to do it all over again, depending on how they treat their own incoming files.

    I agree with you on the last bit, though.. htick was definitely not the original cause. However, it was in fact what told you there was an issue! ;)

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/700 to Mike Powell on Mon Apr 27 12:00:27 2026
    Hey Mike!

    On Mon Aug 24 1970 , you wrote:

    My initial question was "is there a way to tell htick to go ahead and process the files" when it gets an error that, to me, isn't important.

    The answer is "no" so the question is answered.

    Sorry, I missed this part in my previous response.

    The answer is "yes" IF AND ONLY IF you have the original tic file that came with the file in question. The original tic file may have been renamed to *.bad or something. If that were the case, you could remove all of the other crap except for the oldest file (that wasn't renamed), rename .bad to .tic and reprocess the file without the other .tic files and renamed files in the way.

    I have no idea what tickit did, nor do I know what it takes to transition from tickit to htick; whether there was anything left over from that setup or not, so I can't really comment on that.

    If you currently have no issues with htick, and no unprocessed .tic files in your secure inbound directory, then I would suggest you start clean slate now and keep an eye on your logs. If anything new comes about, I'll gladly try to help you get it squared away!

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
    --- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/700)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to Nick Boel on Mon Apr 27 14:58:39 2026

    If you know that your uplink will always send you lowercase files, once those are in the directory they're supposed to be in, you can safely remove the uppercase or mixed case ones (ie. manual cleanup, as I don't think any tic processor does that for you). If you were to ever switch hubs, you may have to do it all over again, depending on how they treat their own incoming files.

    What I am thinking is that it will move the new ones to the directory, the old ones (that are not in all CAPS) will still be there, the new ones will get renamed to something else (like zip.# or the like because they will never be replaced), and the updated file listing might point to the wrong/older file.

    I guess that is not really a problem *here* as no one (that I can tell) ever comes looking for files here. Could be a problem for systems where people do go looking for files.

    I agree with you on the last bit, though.. htick was definitely not the original cause. However, it was in fact what told you there was an issue! ;)

    I don't think it was, either. I labeled the original message "issue" in quotes on purpose. I don't think htick had an issue, was just hoping it might have some config setting or command line parm that I was missing that might help with ignoring it. :D

    $$
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)
  • From Mike Powell@1:2320/107 to Nick Boel on Mon Apr 27 15:03:29 2026

    If you currently have no issues with htick, and no unprocessed .tic files in your secure inbound directory, then I would suggest you start clean slate now and keep an eye on your logs. If anything new comes about, I'll gladly try to help you get it squared away!

    htick, and hpt, seem to work well so far. I have no doubt that most issues I am going to have with one or both are going to be things I left out of the configs. So far folks in this echo have been very helpful pointing out whatever config options I have missed, typos, etc.

    I did have one issue with it exporting messages from a JAM base that were marked DELETED. I asked Claude Code to look at the source and it found what it thought was a bug. I made some notes -- need to find them and report it.

    $$
    --- SBBSecho 3.28-Linux
    * Origin: Capitol City Online (1:2320/107)