HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: volker@sfb256.iam.uni-bonn.de ( Volker A. Brandt )
Subject: Re: 680x0 version of 386BSD?? [Was: Re: Mac version of 386BSD??]
Organization: Applied Math, University of Bonn, Germany
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 09:39:37 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.174205.23671@news.iastate.edu> niko@iastate.edu (Nikolaus E Schuessler) writes:
>Since most of the source is written in C, I believe that most of the time
>is going to be spent writing drivers for disks, displays, etc...

Right, that's what I thought too.  It's just that the project is too big for
me to do alone.

>What platform did you have in mind?

Atari TT or Falcon (68030).  But what I consider most important is the fact
that - when done right - the binaries of all 680x0 implementations will be 
interchangeable, just like the Minix versions for Atari, Mac and Amiga.

-- Volker
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bitnet:   UNM409@DBNRHRZ1                              Volker A. Brandt
UUCP:     ...!unido!DBNRHRZ1.bitnet!unm409             Angewandte Mathematik
Internet: volker@sfb256.iam.uni-bonn.de                (Bonn, Germany)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer)
Subject: Enabling synchronous SCSI mode in AH1542B under 386BSD
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:26:51 GMT

The Adaptec AH1542B does not appear to enable synchronous mode SCSI by
default.  This seems to be done explicitly by the driver on Suns.
Pace's as.c driver does not appear to do anything like that.

Does anybody know of a reason why the AH1542B should not be jumpered to
auto-enable synchronous mode SCSI for devices that support it?
-- 
-- Email info@NeoSoft.com for info on getting interactive Internet access.
You will now awaken feeling relaxed and refreshed, remembering everything 
you've read except the details of the Omega contingency plan.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: 386bsd cross-cpio fix!
From: eje@irenaeus.mlo.dec.com (Eric James Ewanco)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:49:24 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


OK, folks.  Several people mentioned problems with using native cpio on their
non-Intel system, unable to unarchive the BSD distribution. I also ran into
this problem, but none of the suggestions helped me; the cpioswap program, -s,
-b, -c.

Someone suggested using the 386BSD cpio program, except that one needs to
access the archive in order to get it.

But since the 386BSD cpio should be the standard BSD cpio, I downloaded BSD
CPIO and I compiled it.  It works (once I set the _PATH_TTY #define to "/dev/".
Ignore the libraries).  

For those who want it, cpio.c.Z should be available on gatekeeper.dec.com,
pub/bsd-sources-2/usr.bin/cpio/cpio.c.Z.  If anyone wants it I'll mail it to
them.

Eric Ewanco
--
/=============================================================================\
| Eric Ewanco - Software Engineer     For the rash and outrageous opinions ex-|
| Digital Equipment Corp, Maynard MA  pressed herein I alone am responsible;  |
| ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com          they do not belong to DIGITAL(TM).      |
\==============================- 2 Th 2:15 -==================================/
From: peter@micromuse.co.uk (Peter Galbavy)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: com woes
Date: 14 Aug 92 08:00:21 GMT
Organization: MicroMuse Limited, London, England.

spedpr@thor.cf.ac.uk (Paul Richards) writes:

>I too am a bit miffed that we have to have com1 and com2. We had this
>discussion when the linux serial ports were looked at. Personally I
>think it's more important to comply with the rest of the unix world than
>it is to pacify the DOS users. I'm all in favour of easing the
>transition from DOS to unix but they're going to have a bit of a shock
>when they find everything else is zero based. They're going to be even
>more shocked when they find com1 and com2 don't even exist on other unix
>boxes.

Seconded, I agree. Start *all* UN*X devices at number 0...
-- 
Peter Galbavy
Tech Support, Micromuse Ltd
Phone: +44 71 352 7774		E-Mail: P.Galbavy@micromuse.co.uk
From: wswire3@rw9.urc.tue.nl (G. van Rooij)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: where to get 386bsd 0.1 in europe
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:40:13 GMT
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

I didnt see a FAQ mentioning all ftp-mirrors of agate (but I didnt read
all of the newsgroup yet). Is there a list a european ftp-sites for
386bsd v0.1?
-Guido

-- 
===============================================================================
WIRE, Wiskundig Ingenieurs Eindhoven  |  wire@win.tue.nl
PO Box 6421                           |   
5600 HK Eindhoven The Netherlands     |   
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser)
Subject: Re: UUCP woes with 386BSD
Organization: Unixland Public Access Unix  (508) 655-3848
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 17:09:40 GMT

mink@coyote.datalog.com (Clint Ruoho) writes:

>I've been unsuccessful in getting UUCP to work under 386bsd.  Has anybody 
>else out there had any success in this?  Could somebody send me some sample 
>scripts that are better than the default ones?

I tried it this morning and got it working fine.  What exactly was your
problem?

However I have not had any luck getting MAIL to work in a UUCP environment.
I tried to set up sendmail.cf to use UUCP, but it still fails with
"hostname lookup failed" errors.  Seems maybe it's trying to use a nameserver?
Anyone have outbound mail working on 386BSD in a UUCP environment?

-- 
bill@unixland.natick.ma.us                      ESIX Mailing List Moderator
Public Access UNIX/USENET/E-MAIL!  UUCP Accounts Available!  (508) 655-3848
5 lines  -  Located in Natick, MA   USA    Supporting V.32/PEP/V.42bis, etc.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: husemann@camelot.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Dirk Husemann)
Subject: Re: 680x0 version of 386BSD?? [Was: Re: Mac version of 386BSD??]
Organization: CSD., University of Erlangen
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 06:48:25 GMT

tom@afthree.as.arizona.edu (Thomas J. Trebisky) writes:

>In fact if I had an hp300, I could just about open the can, heat and eat.
>I get the impression the guys at Berkeley actually had hp300's on their
>desks, but I could just be starting a rumor.

As far as I know they do. (I do, too 8=). I'm running pre-alpha 4.4 BSD on it
--- I think the CSRG also put in the support for 68040s.

>But this doesn't mean it will be easy.  If it was easy, I would drop it
>and go find something hard to do.  :-)

Once the unencumbered version is out I think it should be easier to port to
other 68k machines than it was for Bill & Lynne to port to the 386/486 
architecture.

	Dirk

Eunuchs [u'nuks] is not a trademark of AT&T.
---
From: sl25@cus.cam.ac.uk (S. Linton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Polling for ctrl-C
Date: 18 Aug 92 13:29:03 GMT

I thknk Ctrl-C trapping is available in recent versions of DJGPP,
though I'm not sure what your options are, it doesn't seem to be
documented anywhere (hint!).

You can always solve your problem, however by simply reading the
keyboard each time you would have polled your flag and checking for
control-C. If you can't process all input at this time then you can
copy the characters you read into a buffer and get them out later
(thus implementing enhanced type-ahead at the same time).

	Steve Linton
From: phr@soda.berkeley.edu (Paul Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Date: 15 Aug 92 21:42:45
Organization: CSUA/UCB
	<63DILTJ@taronga.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: peter@taronga.com's message of Sun, 16 Aug 1992 02:04:55 GMT

    If 386BSD was copylefted, it would be Linux. It's the absence of copyleft
    that leads to the possibility of more than a bunch of random hackers
    benefiting from it.

Please clarify this.  How is anyone else prevented from benefitting
from it?   Say, for example, the same people who now benefit from GCC?
From: abc@banjo.concert.net (Alan B Clegg)
Subject: Modified structure elements in 386BSD vs NET2
Organization: Concert Network -- Internet Operations Group
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:55:42 GMT

While attacking some software, I happened to note the fact that struct tty
(/usr/include/sys/tty.h) is missing the three queues:

        struct  clist t_rawq;           /* queues */
        struct  clist t_canq;
        struct  clist t_outq;

Ring buffers are here instead:

        struct  ringb t_raw;            /* ring buffers */
        struct  ringb t_can;
        struct  ringb t_out;

What is the reasoning for this change?  I understand that the ringb's are
probably more compact, but they aren't standard (are they?) and yes, the 
clists are used in other software...

-abc
-- 
abc@concert.net				Alan Clegg - Network Programmer
KD4JML                               	MCNC -- Center for Communications
   CREDIMUS IN EXISTIMATIONEM INCOMPTAM ET TABULAS MANDATORUM CURRENTES
         I'm contaminated by BSDi source code, how about you?
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: jmessenger@cix.compulink.co.uk (John Messenger)
Subject: Re: AT&T sues BSDI
Reply-To: jmessenger@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:39:17 +0000


386bsd could be Jolix or Jolitz
--
    John Messenger (jmessenger@cix.compulink.co.uk) Tel: +44 904 692700
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro)
Subject: Re: Does 386BSD work with other SCSI controllers?? specifically a DTC 3280?
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:00:13 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.004338.21146@ecst.csuchico.edu> cyber@ecst.csuchico.edu (Erik Berls) writes:

>Im kinda of in the same boat, does anyone know if it will work with a
>DTC 3280 SCSI controller?
>thanks,

Well, I tried it with a DTC 3290 EISA SCSI controller (supposed to be
Adaptec compatible) and it locked up.  Seemed to work with Linux,
though.

Paul


-- 
Niven's Law #14:   There exist minds that think as well as you do, but
                   differently.
Niven's Corollary: The gene-tampered turkey you're talking to isn't
                   necessarily one of them.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: cflatter@nrao.edu (Chris Flatters)
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (R
Reply-To: cflatter@nrao.edu
Organization: NRAO
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:44:01 GMT

In article 8526@fcom.cc.utah.edu, terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:
>Does [the GPL] mean that I can't sell my own program (we'll call it '/usr/bin/true')
>for $500.00, and then give away GNU Hurd in order to run it, but don't tell
>anyone what the program is (except you all know now ;-)), offer to send source,
>like in GPL, but say they can't copy it because they can't distinguish my
>part from GNU's part?

You don't have to supply source for your own /usr/bin/true because you stuck
it in the same packet with the GNU Hurd (unless of course it is a modified
version of a GNU /usr/bin/true).  You still have to supply source for the
Hurd and you can not restrict the rights of anyone who gets the source from
you to make further copies of the Hurd source.

>Because Hurd is an OS, does this mean that *any* application that runs on it
>is a derivitive work and falls under GNU Public License?

No. Even a lawyer would think that that was silly.

	Chris Flatters
	cflatter@nrao.edu

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: time for comp.unix.bsd.386
Organization: Weber State University  (Ogden, UT)
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 02:52:46 GMT

In article <34254@hoptoad.uucp> brendan@cygnus.com writes:
>Any reason not to start a discussion for creating comp.unix.bsd.386?
>(For the many people who are interested in geeric BSD issues, but
>could care less about device drivers in 386BSD, etc.)

This discussion has come up before.  You should:

o	Find out just how many "plain old bsd questions" occur here as
	opposed to comp.unix.questions.

o	Name a better place besides a bunch of 4.3 kernel and app hackers
	to ask a BSD question.

o	Find out how much traffic would be left if 386BSD/BSDI moved elsewhere.


					Terry Lambert
					terry_lambert@gateway.novell.com
					terry@icarus.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       terry@icarus.weber.edu
 "I have an 8 user poetic license" - me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: dawes@physics.su.OZ.AU (David Dawes)
Subject: Re: X386 far too busy?
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 08:34:13 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.211128.7958@novatel.cuc.ab.ca> hpeyerl@novatel.cuc.ab.ca (Herb Peyerl) writes:
>Hi...
>
>I started the server about 18 hours ago and left it with only 
>two xterm's, an icon box, and an xclock running... There was
>basically no activity all night.  This morning I did a "ps -agx"
>and noticed that X386 had racked up 1145:23.29 CPU (minutes?)... 
>That's sort of horrendous isn't it?  I'm presently typing on an
>Apollo DN3500 running an X11R4 server... The node's been up since
>July 16th and is the node I work on all day long every day and it's
>only racked up 465 CPU minutes...
>
>I'm wondering if there's something brutal going on in the X386 server...
>I mean, I realize that an ET3000 is not your typically fast card
>but XTerm's are REALLY grim... Maybe I'm just used to this Apollo
>(which, on it's own is not overly impressive compared to say an 
>HP720...)
>
>I dunno... Just wondering if anyone else has noticed this?

Try applying the com.c patch posted a little while back.  The problem
is that select() keeps telling the server you've moved the mouse even
when you haven't.

David
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 David Dawes (dawes@physics.su.oz.au)    DoD#210      | Phone: +61 2 692 2639
 School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia   | Fax:   +61 2 660 2903
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: mab@duvel.princeton.edu (Matt Blaze)
Subject: Re: "UNIX" is not the registered trademark of AT&T in Japan.
Organization: Princeton University, Dept. of Computer Science
Date: 14 Aug 92 05:14:18 GMT

grog@adagio.UUCP (Greg Lehey) writes:

>In article <2759@tansei1.tansei.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> mhiroshi@tansei.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (H. Murakami) writes:
>>A little fact that you might be interested in.
>>
>>In Japan, the word "UNIX" is not the registered trademark of USL nor AT&T,

>I don't know the details in Germany, but next time you want to rent a
>car in Germany, you might find it amusing to rent it from a company
>called UNIX-Rent-Autovermietung-Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH in
>Frankfurt am Main (telephone +49-69-619054). No, I don't have any
>connection with the company - I just found the name amusing.
>-- 
>Greg Lehey                       | Tel: +49-6637-1488              
>LEMIS                            | Fax: +49-6637-1489
>Schellnhausen 2, W-6324 Feldatal, Germany
>*** NOTE ***: Headers are mangled - reply to grog%lemis@Germany.EU.net

UNIX is also the brand name of a fire extinguisher in Egypt. (If you
go to the museum in Cairo you'll see lots of them.  No, i don't think
they're on display).

-matt
--
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: niko@iastate.edu (Nikolaus E Schuessler)
Subject: Re: 680x0 version of 386BSD?? [Was: Re: Mac version of 386BSD??]
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:42:05 GMT


>
>I would like to generalize the question:  Is anyone out there seriously
>thinking about porting 386BSD to a Motorola platform?

Since most of the source is written in C, I believe that most of the time
is going to be spent writing drivers for disks, displays, etc...

What platform did you have in mind?

-- 
Niko Schuessler               
Project Vincent Systems Manager              email: niko@iastate.edu
Iowa State University Computation Center     voice: (515) 294-1672
Ames IA 50010                                snail: 272 Durham
From: jrbd@craycos.com (James Davies)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Restrictions on 'free' UNIX / 386BSD (Re: selling 386BSD)
Summary: parts are already under copyleft
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:55:11 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <l8n8qcINN2c5@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:

>If people like cgd really feel obligated to contribute 'contaminated' code
>then their contributions should be made available separately from the free
>redistributable core -- preferably in a separate 'restricted' distribution
>-- and clearly labeled 'infectious waste' -- with ample warnings to future
>users of such code about potential intellectual property rights claims and
>intellectual health risks.  In my opinion the same label should be applied
>to anything carrying the even more restrictive GNU copyleft.  

Excuse my ignorance, but doesn't 386BSD use gcc?  Sounds like it's already
contaminated beyond all hope of redemption...
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown)
Subject: Re: selling 386BSD (was Re: 386BSD on CD-ROM?)
Organization: I can't see any in the immediate vicinity...
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 06:03:08 GMT


It's not clear to me what the fuss is all about.

Say that a copyright, regardless of who owns it, states that what is being
copyrighted (a) is freely redistributable (i.e., anyone can give it to
anyone else), (b) can be put to whatever legal use someone wants to put
it to, e.g. commercial repackaging and selling, modification and
reselling, modification and free redistribution of the modified version,
etc., and (c) any modified version *must* be distributed with source as
part of the distribution, but other than being included with the
normal distribution, can be distributed with any copyright provisions.

If you use a copyright like the above, then what's the big deal?  All you
have to do with respect to distribution is insure that all the pieces have
copyrights that include the above conditions, and you're all set, right? 
Universities won't have a problem because they can obtain a copy of the
software for free and then do whatever they like with it.  Companies won't
have a problem with it because they can "add value" to the base package and
distribute the changed version in any way they like.  End users won't have
any basic problems with it because they're guaranteed to get the source and
can make whatever private changes they need (and are guaranteed to be able
to get the base distribution if they need something they can distribute
themselves).

The end result?  The base version will contain only those features that
people wish to make freely redistributable.  Inasmuch as a company which
participates in doing this can make a name for itself, it's an advertising
win for such a company.  But a company can also participate as above *and*
sell modified, proprietary versions to satisfy the specific needs of its
customers.

So what am I so naively overlooking?  A copyright like the above seems
to me, offhand, to solve all the problems that I've seen brought up
with respect to copylefts and private copyrights.  Only companies that
insist on a binary-only distribution and groups that insist on free
redistribution of modifications to their software will have problems...


-- 
				Kevin Brown

			    kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
			    kevin@taronga.taronga.com
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: gson@niksula.hut.fi (Andreas Gustafsson)
Subject: Re: Tiny 386BSD boot problem w/IDE and Adaptec SCSI
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:08:01 GMT

In <1992Aug14.050157.10658@i88.isc.com> mikebo@i88.isc.com writes:

> Sorry if this is a FAQ. Is there a problem with booting Tiny 386BSD
> on a machine with IDE primary and Adaptec SCSI secondary disk controllers?
...
> as0 at 0x330 irq 11 drq 5 on isa
> npx0 at 0xf0 irq 13 on isa
> Changing root device to fd0a
>
> The SCSI bus busy light goes on solid and stays that way - system is
> hung hard. 

Make sure that the Adaptec is indeed jumpered for IRQ 11 and DRQ 5. 
I normally keep my Adaptec jumpered for IRQ 10 for the benefit of a
different OS, and when I try booting the Tiny 386BSD disk it will hang
after the "Changing root device to fd0a" message unless I rejumper the
board to IRQ 11.

This behaviour is of course stupid and unnecessary, because the
Adaptec has a command for querying its jumper settings.  The device
driver should at the very least notice when the adapter has
inappropriate jumper settings, give a warning message and then ignore
the adapter so that the boot sequence can continue, instead of just
silently hanging.
-- 
Andreas Gustafsson
Internet: gson@niksula.hut.fi
Voice: +358 0 563 5592
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
From: feoh@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Patti)
Subject: Could someone verify the behaviour of lpc for me? (just finished a port)
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 19:50:18 GMT


Hello. I've just finished a port of BSD's line printer daemon suite to another
(inferior) Unix, and I was wondering if someone could help me figure out if my
port of LPC,specifically the "topq" command works as it should..

if LPQ displays a list of three jobs, 15, 16, and 17, and from within LPC I
type 'topq laser 16 root' a subsequent LPQ reveals that topq reordered the
jobs sequenced as 15 17 16.

Is this the correct behavior for topq? the source code would seem to indicate
this to be the case, but I just want to check to be sure.

Please e-mail your responses to: feoh@gnu.ai.mit.edu

Thanks in advance.
Chris Patti


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Patti | feoh@gnu.ai.mit.edu: A guest of the Free Software Foundation
=========#include <gratuitous_witty_quotes_section_to_waste_bandwidth>=========
"War is a symphony of destruction, orchestrated by few, paid for by many."
From: kolstad@BSDI.COM (Rob Kolstad)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: BSDI BSD/386 Update
Date: 12 Aug 1992 13:45:26 -0400
Organization: Berkeley Software Design
Distribution: comp
NNTP-Posting-Host: bsdi.com
Keywords: Update, Gamma Release, Progress Report

This is a quick progress report on things at BSDI.

The first Gamma tapes have been shipped to our engineers.  First customer
Gamma tapes will be shipped later this week.  We'll be doing new Gamma
releases about every two weeks until all the functionality works and the
release is considered solid.  We're running about a week behind the latest
publicly-announced schedule, and are still hoping to make first production
shipment around September 30th or so (it could be a week or two later).

8514 support (e.g., ATI Graphic Ultra) is working -- and it's incredibly
fast.  The DOS execution mode has only one known bug; it boots in less
than three seconds our 486/25.  Autoconfiguration and expanded device
support are in -- and they comprise the main focus of the first Gamma
release.  They seem to be OK so far.  DOS Co-residency is slated for the
next Gamma cut (*sigh*).

We'll be announcing new pricing soon, but I wanted to share one highlight
since school is getting ready to start:

	Educational Site License:	$2,000/year

An educational site is typified by the University of Oklahoma's Norman
campus, not the entire State of Oklahoma higher education system.  The
license includes telephone support with a single point of contact and
complete ugprades.  The license authorizes an unlimited number of source
and binary copies (including at students' and faculty homes), as long as
the software is returned when the student/faculty are no longer affiliated
with the University.

I can't discuss our legal situation here but wish to extend thanks to all
of our supporters.  My mailbox has been quite lively the last few
months.

We are continuing on our release schedule and will be conducting business
as usual.

Please contact me for more information.

							RK

-- 
         /\      Rob Kolstad           Berkeley Software Design, Inc. 
      /\/  \     kolstad@bsdi.com      7759 Delmonico Drive
     / /    \    719-593-9445          Colorado Springs, CO  80919