HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY MARTIN SMITH)
Subject: Where is .98? 
Originator: jmsmith@c00802-247dan.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jmsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (JEFFREY MARTIN SMITH)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 22:58:52 GMT


Im looking for the .98 kernel.
I saw a posting about 2 days ago that said where it was but I can't remember.
Thanks,
Jeff 
-- 
Romana: "I thought you said we were coming here for May Week?"
Doctor: "I did, May Week's in June."
                                 --Shada and The Five Doctors--
Jeffrey Smith     -<KD4AYH>-       jmsmith@eos.ncsu.edu
From: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: TTY naming schemes (again)
Date: 6 Oct 92 08:45:18 GMT
Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin)
Organization: You must be kidding!

This should really have been a followup, but I was unable to locate the
original...

A while ago I mentioned the ugly, unnessecary and possibly confusing naming
conflict currently used with tty's.  More specifically, the name /dev/ttys?
currently refers to *both* a set of PTY slaves and to serial ports.  I
proposed using the BSD naming scheme /dev/tty[a-z] for serial ports, but
Theodore Tytso (I believe) commented that with various devices, 26
possibilities might not be enough, and suggested /dev/ttyS# ... where # is
a number from 1 to 64 or 0 to 63.  Since some programs do assume tty names
of the form /dev/tty?? or /dev/tty?, I have another suggestion:

	/dev/tty[1-8]	            ... for VTcons
	/dev/tty[a-d][0-9a-f]	    ... for serial ports
	/dev/tty[p-z][0-9a-f]	    ... for PTY slaves

This would avoid the practical and aestetic conflict while still remaining
close to other systems.  It doesn't have the weight of an already adopted
system, but I do believe the variance in TTY names is great enough it won't
be any problem whatsoever.

	/hpa

P.S: For ugly naming conventions... look at AIX
-- 
INTERNET:  hpa@nwu.edu   TALK:      hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
BITNET:    HPA@NUACC     IBMNET:    16331@IBMX400
HAM RADIO: N9ITP         NeXTMAIL:  hpa@lenny.acns.nwu.edu
"Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray."  -- R. Heinlein
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: corsini@firmin.greco-prog.fr (Marc-Michel CORSINI)
Subject: FAQ, next release
Reply-To: corsini@firmin.greco-prog.fr (Marc-Michel CORSINI)
Organization: The Internet
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 15:48:56 GMT


Hi Linuxers,
The new FAQ will be available on Tuesday.

Below are the one who (will) have something to do with the FAQ.

If any one else wants to join the "FAQ maintainers gang", just drop me a
note (with what you want do deal with) at
	corsini@{labri,firmin,geocub}.greco-prog.fr 

WHO 			(WHAT) 		E-MAIL
=============================================================================
Lars Wirzenius 		(META-FAQ) 	wirzeniu@cc.helsinki.fi
Mark Komarinski 	(DOS) 	 	komarimf@craft.camp.clarkson.edu
Matt Welsh		(INSTALLATION)	mdw@tc.cornell.edu
A. V. Le Blanc		(MCC, DOS)	LeBlanc@mcc.ac.uk
Ward			(MGR)		ward@papagayo.srcc.lsu.edu
Drew Eckhardt		(SCSI)		headrest.woz.colorado.edu
Hongjiu Lu		(GCC)		hlu@eecs.wsu.edu
Krishna Balasubramanian (X11)		balasub@cis.ohio-state.edu 
Jim Gifford		(SERIAL)	jgifford@{attmail,world.std}.com
Marc-Michel Corsini	(FAQ collector)	corsini@{labri,firmin}.greco-prog.fr
============================================================================


			[mmc]
From: pfaffman@pilot.njin.net (Jay Pfaffman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Austin Code Works copying fees (was Re: Who will handle ...)
Keywords: Advertising
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:07:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

weberj@dia.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de (Weber) writes:

>In article <BvAxpB.74G@ucunix.san.uc.edu> zuazaga@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Humberto Ortiz-Zuazaga) writes:
>>advertizing BSD386 0.1 and Linux 0.96 together for $100.  I think the
>>word is slowly getting out.

>So Linus put in many man-months for free and those people want
>$100 just for copying?

Yes.  I'm frequently amazed by the prices they charge for free
software.  On the other hand, for those without access to the
Internet, it's surely worth i, since it's the only place you can get
the stuff. & if they give you SLS plus the 3 BSD distibutions (base,
source, etc). $100 might be a fair price for ~40 disks.  It still pisses
me off, though.
-- 
Jay Pfaffman, Computer Coordinator        pfaffman@pilot.njin.net
Dwight-Englewood School, 315 E. Palisade Ave.                      
Englewood, NJ  07631-0489                 201-569-9500
(Testing  new site --> pfaffman@relax.mcds.com)
From: probreak@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (James Michael Chacon)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Writing Linux disks on Sun
Keywords: sun
Date: 7 Oct 92 02:14:06 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

ucosmo@mcl.ucsb.edu (Boris Burtin) writes:

>I was just curious if someone had a solution to this problem.  It seems that
>you can only write DOS disks on a Sun Sparc if you are root and can mount a
>DOS floppy.  Does someone have an alternate solution?  Linux can't read a
>disk tarred on a Sun, can it?

What I do on our suns, is to ftp the files down, and then use mtools to 
write them to floppy. I don't remember if you need root permission to run
mtools, as I know the setuid bits aren't needed for it here. You will need to
have /dev/rfd0 read/writable by at least you.

>--
>     - Boris
>(cosmo@cs.ucsb.edu)

James
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: smace@nyx.cs.du.edu (Scott Mace)
Subject: Re: I'm new to this group
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 21:12:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.184217.5362@cis.ohio-state.edu> rice@shaggyman.cis.ohio-state.edu (daniel rice) writes:
>I also am new to this group could someone please tell me how to obtain
>linux for my IBM PC.
>I have a 486-33 with Trident SVGA and monitor 214 meg HD and 2 megs of ram
>Thanks,
>        Dan
>rice@cis.ohio-state.edu

Linux will run on any machine that is a 386 or better and has at least 2
megs.  It should work with just 2 megs, but it will be slow on some
things, I would suggest a minimum of 4 megs.

you can obtain linux from nic.funet.fi under pub/OS/Linux or 18.172.1.2
(I can never remember the name) under pub/linux.  I would suggest
18.172.1.2 if you live in the states.  Read the faq there and get what
you need.
--
*********************************************************************
*    Scott Mace                internet:    smace@nyx.cs.du.edu      *
*                                          emace@tenet.edu          *
*********************************************************************
From: toivo@ucs.uwa.OZ.AU (Toivo Pedaste)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: MSDOS file system problem
Date: 29 Sep 1992 01:44:35 GMT
Organization: The University of Westrn Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: sage.ucs.uwa.edu.au

I'm running the 0.97-p4 and I can panic the kernal by moving directories
around on a mounted MSDOS file system. This happens both on hard disk
and floppies.

For example, on a floppy
	mkdir a b c d e f g h i j
	mv * a
will cause a panic.

If I try and mount the disk later it produces 

Panic: Fat error

The disk can be read under DOS but if you run CHKDSK (or is it DSKCHK),
if fails trying to read the FAT.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
 Toivo Pedaste                        Email:  toivo@ucs.uwa.edu.au
 University Computing Services,       Phone:  +61 9 380 2605
 University of Western Australia      Fax:    +61 9 380 1014
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: delozier@Condor.mcs.kent.edu (Greg Delozier)
Subject: Any ex-Minixers? I need 3.5" PC Minix...
Organization: Kent State University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 04:34:21 GMT

Like the line says, I need to buy, preferably second-hand, a copy
of Minix/PC on 3.5" disks for a project I'm doing. Yes, I know, 
Linux runs much better, etc., but at the moment I have a need for a
286 *nix, so humor me, ok? 

Anyway, please let me know... thanks!

-greg
From: liljeber@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Mika Liljeberg)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Just upgraded to 0.97p6...
Date: 26 Sep 92 22:56:34 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Helsinki, Finland

In article <1992Sep25.154926.9076@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) wrote:
> And now the really nasty thing:
> 
> 6. I have tried to install tcsh under 0.96 and it refused to run,
> the reason for which I could track down to the missing stat()
> (again...) but now under 0.97 it does nothing but dump core :-(
> I'm still working on it.

Where did you get your tcsh from? There is a complete port of tcsh 6.02
on nic.funet.fi, sunsite.unc.edu and tsx-11.mit.edu. You will need jump
library 4.x to run the included binary (and gcc 2.2.2d7 with the new libs,
if you want to compile it yourself). Linux 0.97pl4 should be sufficient.
Tcsh 6.03 (coming out soonish) will compile out of the box, barring
awkward changes in the libraries.
--
Mika Liljeberg			Email:	liljeber@hydra.Helsinki.FI
Helsinki University			Mika.Liljeberg@Helsinki.FI
Dept. of Computer Science
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: wolff@zen.et.tudelft.nl (Rogier Wolff)
Subject: What does "can't init core device" mean?
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 16:39:27 GMT

Hi,

I've just installed X11v2.0, and got a 

	Cannot initialize core devices.

error. I've checked that my /dev/mem and so forth are available.
I also scanned the binary, and it seems as if this error message is not
"close" do a string like /dev/mem, so I couldn't find out what 
"core devices" it was trying to initialize.

Does anybody know what is going wrong? 

(I'm running 0.97p6, Gcc2.2.2d, and just downloaded the jump4.1 libs)

					Roger
-- 
****   a 486 in V86 mode is like a VW buggy with a 6 litre V12 motor.  ****
EMail:  wolff@duteca.et.tudelft.nl   ** Tel  +31-15-783644 or +31-15-142371
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: s2848632@techst02.technion.ac.il (Zachi Friedman)
Subject: No screens found (guess it's a FAQ)
Organization: Technion, Israel Inst. of Technology
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:05:29 GMT

Hi X386 users,
I guess it's a FAQ (I even think I remember someone asked it before):
startx.notcp (on X386v2.0) gives me
	Fatal server error:
	   no screens found.

So, what is wrong (If I remember correctly, it has something to do with 
/dev/??????)

thanks in advance,
	Zachi.
From: eoi@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Chenmin Zhang)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: GCC 2.2.2d, lib41, and Jump 4.1, bootable root disk
Keywords: GCC 2.2.2d, lib41, and jump 4.1, bootable root disk
Date: 2 Oct 92 22:05:22 GMT
Organization: Purdue University


     I got bootable disk for linux 0.97.6 kernel and all the GCC 2.2.2d,
lib4.1, jump4.1 stuff from tsx-11.mit.edu site.  When it went to install
GCC 2.2.2d and math, jump table: first I got the 0.98 kernel at /usr/src and
then unpak 222d7 according H.J said.  Second, when I unpak lib41.tar and run
lib-4.1.sh, it complainted that it couldn't find "id" command.  I found one
command in 0.97.1 rootdisk (it is not in bootable root disk) and copied
over.  I run the script again, it complaint that couldn't find /lib/2.2.2
, I guess because it was compiled with old gcc libaray, so I copied this
file from 0.97.1.  When I run the script again, it runs and asks me the
387 stuff, suddenly some error messages appear saying that "chmod, chown
couldn't some directory or files, then nearly all the command couln't
be used.  I check the /usr, /etc, /usr/bin..., all command permission
became -rw-r-r, no execute flag.  Since I couln't find what was the original
flag, I deleted all the stuff from / and wanted to copy all the / stuff
from bootable root disk, and I found the version number (?) couldn't be
copied.  Like lilo, in bootable root floppy disk, it it:
lilo  -dwrx--r-w   2 system  root    ./lilo....
(something like that).  But after copied to hard disk, it became:
lilo  -dwrx--r-w   1 system  root    ./lilo....
I don't know what should I do to reinstall the / but keep my /usr untouch
since I have a lot of stuff in there.  

Is there something wrong in my installation?  Is there anything wrong in
lib-4.1.sh script?

Do I need to install lib41 since I found some libraries in /lib which 
indeed is libm.4.0 and libc.4.1?  

Help please!

---
chenmin
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: stolk@fwi.uva.nl (Bram)
Subject: up to date sources of fsck
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 11:29:49 GMT

Hi,


I am looking for the sources of fsck.
However, the file
/pub/linux/attic/sources/sbin/fsck.c.Z
is obsolete. (that figures, cause it's tucked away in the attic :-)

When I try to compile the obsolete fsck.c I get lotsa
errors complaining about undefined stuff.
Where can I find a current version of fsck.c?

	Thanks in advance,

		Bram Stolk

+-------------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| "Flying is a nack... the trick is   |  Bram Stolk (stolk@fwi.uva.nl)     |
|  to throw yourself at the ground,   |  Dept. of maths. & computer sience |
|  and miss..."  - Douglas Adams      |  University of Amsterdam	   |
+-------------------------------------+------------------------------------+
		 		  No, I dont use ms-winDOZE, I prefer Linux!
From: ralf@wpi.WPI.EDU (Ralph Valentino)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: pow() broken?
Date: 5 Oct 92 18:01:35 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu

Is pow() broken under Mach, or is it my imagination?  At first I
thought it was my libm.a, but I it turns out xcalc (which I didn't
compile) is also incapable of doing y^x where x>2 (ie: 2^3 = NaN) on
my system.  I tried the same code under DOS with gnu C and forcing all
floating point to use the coprocessor (SET 387=YES) and it worked just
fine...

I then reverted my 486 from Mach mk79/ux38 to 2.6MSD and I still can't
get it to work.  I was able to repeat this on a 386 as well.  Code below.

So, what gives?
-Ralph

compiled with -lm:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>

main()
{
  double a = 2.0 ,b = 3.0 ,c;
  c = pow(a,b);
  printf("pow = %g\n",c);
}
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang)
Subject: Building the kernel on a Non-mach platform (cross-development)
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Distribution: comp
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:30:53

Hi!

I need to build the Mach 3.0 micro-kernel, the utilities (eg. MIG),
and possibly some of the servers on a non-Mach platform.

I am working on doing a port of the Mach 3.0 microkernel, where the
target is a locally designed hyper-cube machine with i486-based
nodes. 

The host-machine where I am planning to do the build, is one of the
three following machines:
 o an i486 AT-bus machine running 386BSD (my preferred development
   host).
 o an i386 AT-bus machine running Sys V/386 R3.2
 o an i486 AT-bus machine running Interactive UNIX

We use gcc on the host to compile programs for the nodes. The loader
on the nodes does the necessary work to get the host executables up
and running on the node. (It's not exactly cross-compilation since
both machines use the same processor architecture, but it is at least
cross-development.)

I can't get hold of Mach 2.5 until we get some BSD-license stuff fixed
(which may take time), and I would like to avoid the hassle of
installing Yet Another OS if I could.

I've been reading through the Mach 3.0 build docs on mach.cs.cmu.edu.
The most promising so far is "Building Mach with ODE tools"
(Author:Mary R. Thompson, Date:9 July 92). This paper unfortunately
says that the only stuff that is building with the tools so far, is
the tools themselves and the BNR/BSD server.

I need something that will build the kernel and all of the necessary
servers.

So my question is:
 o Does anybody have a setup that will compile the kernel and servers
   on any of the above platforms (or a similar platform, eg. BSD on a
   different platform)? Patches to GNU Make? Patches to gcc-cpp?

Thanx!

- Steinar
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: jkh@esel.lotus.com (Jordan K Hubbard)
Subject: Shared libraries for the UX server - anyone working on it?
Organization: Lotus Ireland
Distribution: comp
Date: 5 Oct 92 13:44:15

The subject says it all...   Does anyone know if Linux's shared libraries
are done in the kernel, or all with ld.so?  Perhaps some code could be
borrowed (I don't have a copy of Linux, so I can't see for myself).

In any case, shared libraries would be a Really Good Thing.  1.6MB motif
binaries are getting old fast.  I'm surprised with all the OS hackers
at CMU that noone has taken up this particular torch.


					Jordan
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: aardvark@nt1l.krl.com (Donald Koch)
Subject: Re: OSF for 386?
Organization: Koch Research Labs
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:02:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.100843.13297@osf.org>, loveluck@gr.osf.org (James Loveluck) writes:
> In article <1992Sep29.082651.12579@osf.org> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)  
> writes:
> > In article <GTHAKER.92Sep28112145@trantor.atl.ge.com>,  
> gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com (Gautam H. Thaker) writes:
> > > In article <1992Sep23.115943.22188@osf.org> sp@osf.org (Simon  
> Patience) writes:
> > > 
> > >    [..edited licensing terms follow...]
> > > 			   OSF/1 MK Distribution
> > > 			   ---------------------
> > >    Licensing Conditions
> > >    --------------------
[...]
> > > This is a rather discouraging price structure. As a commercial  
> organization
> > > what the above tells me is that if I want to set up a lab
> > > with 8 OSF/1 MK machines my cost will be (approximately):
> > >
> > > 	486-50 MHz, 16 Mb memory, 200 Mb hard drive EISA etc. $3K each
> > > 	$25k to be member of OSF.
> > >         Source licenses for my 486 machines                   $25K  
> each.
> > >             
> _____________________________________________________________
> > > 	Total	                                              $249K
> > > 
> > > This seems high when one considers that hardware is only $24K of this
> > > total!  It seems that OSF/1 licensing is only meant for people who  
> plan to
> > > get redistribution rights and then sell a lot of binaries. 

I believe that this is their intention.  OSF is not primarily in the end user
business.

> It does not cost 25K$ for each CPU. This is the "Initial source license"  
> fee, which covers one designated COU; addtional CPUs can be added for 3K$.
> [NB These fees are for OSF/1 Release 1, and have changed foe Release 1.1;  
> for up to date information you should contact OSF Direct Channels  
> (direct@osf.org)]

Furthermore, it seems to me that you only need ONE source license and 8
binary licenses (which have to be cheaper).  You don't really need source
on all of the machines, do you?

-- 
Don Koch
aardvark@nt1l.krl.com
From: rochat@irisa.fr (Bruno Rochat)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Multibus II driver
Date: 29 Sep 92 10:18:57 GMT
Organization: IRISA, Rennes (Fr)


	Hello,

	We are porting Mach 3.0 (mk75) on a Multibus II 
	loosely coupled multiprocessor. Does anyone know of
	a message passing driver for the Multibus II ?

	Thanks in advance for answers.

 _____________________________________________________________
     __
    /  )                   Fault Tolerant Multiprocessor project
   /--<                    INRIA RENNES-IRISA
  /___/ R U N O            Campus Universitaire de Beaulieu
                           35042 RENNES CEDEX - FRANCE
                           Tel. : 99.36.20.00
                           e-mail rochat@irisa.fr
 _____________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach,comp.periphs.scsi
From: eisert@alf.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Bjoern Eisert)
Subject: --- HELP ! ---- ( Mach AND(?) another OS ?)
Summary: -
Keywords: mach,os/2,os,question
Organization: Univ. Bremen, Informatik
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:39:09 GMT


                       Hi !

 Can anybody tell me about the loader from MACH (386) ??

    	I want to boot MACH from the Bootmanager from OS/2 2.0
        but this seems to fail because of something like a bootid80
        question from MACH.

          - HOW to prevent this ?
          _ HAS anybody thougt about this problem
          - CAN ANYBODY HELP MEEE  ???!!!


    |;-)  ->   =:+(  ->  =   :-{    ...  ;-)
                                      Bjoern
                                      [eisert@alf.zfn.uni-bremen.de]
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: OSF for 386?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:23:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.160238@nt1l.krl.com>, aardvark@nt1l.krl.com (Donald Koch) writes:
> > > In article <GTHAKER.92Sep28112145@trantor.atl.ge.com>,  
> > gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com (Gautam H. Thaker) writes:
> > > > This seems high when one considers that hardware is only $24K of this
> > > > total!  It seems that OSF/1 licensing is only meant for people who  
> > plan to
> > > > get redistribution rights and then sell a lot of binaries. 
> 
> I believe that this is their intention.  OSF is not primarily in the end user
> business.

This is not our intention. It is a side effect from having USL licenced
code in the system. The per CPU charge for source is a System V licence
requirement, not an OSF requirement.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: ejsvehla@happy.colorado.edu
Subject: Mach/OSF Working Groups
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 3 Oct 92 09:45:45 MDT

Hello,

I am interested in paricipating in Mach and OSF working groups/commitees.  Does
anyone know how I can get started?

Thanks in Advance!
From: thomas@itd.nrl.navy.mil (George Thomas,16/232,47106,5531)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: Mach for 386/486
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:28:42 GMT
Reply-To: thomas@itd.nrl.navy.mil
Distribution: world
Organization: Information Technology Division, Naval Research Laboratory


What are my choices if I want to get Mach 3.0 for my 386/486 machine?

Georg Thomas
thomas@itd.nrl.navy.mil

Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
From: jdoyle@phy.umassd.edu (J.D.)
Subject: NE2000 Ethernet support with i386 Mach 3.0 default device drivers?
Keywords: ns8390 ne2000 10base2
Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 23:10:31 GMT

	The i386 Mach 3.0 distribution contains a generic NS8390
Ethernet driver in the source release. Will this drive the Novell NE2000

10Base5/2 card without modification?? Its supports a number of other
cards (i.e. Western Digital)( that use the same LANCE chip.


...... J.D.
From: nhk@informatik.uni-kiel.dbp.de (Nils-Henner Krueger)
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Subject: paper on Mach memory management
Date: 2 Oct 92 09:29:41 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Kiel, FRG

I've got an incomplete copy of the paper 
"Architecture-Independent Virtual Memory Management for
 Parallel and Distributed Enviroments: The Mach Approach",
written by Avadis Tevanian in 1987.

Could anybody give me a hint where I could ftp this text as a ps or
dvi file? Does anybody know the email adress of the author?

Thank's for help!

Nils-Henner 


          Nils-Henner Krueger, Waitzstr. 98, 2300 Kiel, Germany
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 email: nk@ki.maus.de (short text-messages < 16kB, _NO_ binaries)    DAILY
        nhk@informatik.uni-kiel.dbp.de (long mails, uuencoded files) WEEKLY/2
Newsgroups: comp.os.mach