This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
from hb55 i think as i tested
cache connected and working better than before
also cccam and mgcamd
cacheex got a very good percentage as i test and follow
great work after many years of work HB TEAM give the best now
It as not so with with hit it very clean and have good config as well without fake CW or bad
With old version their many still run with old version like r69 70 etc and this have not work for example NDS wiche need disabledcwr that why getting many fake CW
I have been Using Multics for many years guys since 2012 when it all started, So I can give you a few decent pointers.
1, @turbopower, You say above that it is worth to be mentioned, switching from 32 to 55 means starting from scratch.
My Answer to that:
Any member can run HBv32 and setup the New HBv55 so they keep the HBv32 while they are building the HBv55 from scatch
& yes it has to be only HBv55 to HBv55 and new peers so if all did build a new system HBv55 then there would be many many new HBv55 users wanting to exchange there new build HBv55, That way you can still enjoy the HBv32 while the HBv55 is being built with all new cache peers Hbv55.
2, @VFL, again what you have said depends on how the HBv32 users have setup there HBv32,
You Have said: With old version their many still run with old version like r69 70 etc and this have not work for example NDS wiche need disabledcwr that why getting many fake CW
My Answer to that is this:
Most that have setup there HBv32 correctly will not have the older versions of r69 r70 ect ect Example I have removed all older versions of multics & only keep the R82 Nano as my minimum cache peers exchange. the rest r69 r70 r78 r81 are not in my HBv32 those peers are all removed and the IP of all those peers have been banned & yes i know that all HBv32 users should do the same as what i have said but this is where the HBv32 will disable the cwr when this line is paced in the HBv32:
This will disable all the bad NDS and at that Point the HBv32 is a very good version of Multics to use.
So Guys the Idea of helping Members is to give them the best info they would need.
Finally I do agree with most said, But it does help to also say there are ways to use the HBv32 & start a New system build HBv55 that way the shares all still running in the HBv32 while building the HBv55, If all the Multics old version users took this advise then Once they have built there New HBv55 they can at that point remove the HBv32 and enjoy have a nice new system running the HBv55.
@ Talks yah only exchange peer with Hb 26-32 and orginal R32 now it r107 did right from evileyes. From r107 did block r82 nano r83 nano r84 nano. Why ? Their is not good with NDS only good with other.
For the nano version their have 1byth cwdiff wiche was long told hapstor that cwdiff getting freez of NDS. That why r107 was block connect with nano version.
With the 1817 1818 1819 i can only go on what was said in the change log when the HB first had the nds block but i do not veiw these channels so i can not be 100% shure about them as part of the crc block.
To answer about the r82 nano and above they are still very usefull to keep with the HBv32 because the way i see sharing is simple, It is not all about the NDS providers
there are hundreds of other providers that still work in sharing and are not NDS so work very well with the nano versions of multics.
Agreed that WHEN the provider can change then we can change UNTIL that time we can still share HBv32 with all that the sharing offers.
I can say that HBv5+ is great yes so there is nothing wrong with what i have said to the way to build the New HBv55.
Yah for nano work well but then better not sent the cacheex into oscam other wish it show lots of cwdiff and who only oscam he not like that to get cwdiff it sould very less cwdiff not like 10 min have 1000 cwdiff it can caus freez or some glitch