HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: esprit@netcom.com (Alan F. Perry)
Subject: Problems with Interactive UNIX 3.0
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 07:13:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 


I am running Interactive UNIX 3.0 on my Unisys PW2/850 (Mitsubishi MP386)
off of a SCSI disk on an Adaptec 1542 SCSI card and I am having a couple
problems.  I don't know if they are my problems or the software is buggy,
but, since I have had very little luck getting help from those <not-nice-
name-deleted> at Sunsoft/Interactive, I figured that I would run them
past the net.

Problem 1.  The first partition on the disk is DOS.  The second partition
is UNIX.  When I try to boot from the DOS partition from the Interactive-
supplied boot program, the system does not come up.  It comes up fine
in Unix, though.  I am able to boot DOS from floppy, then access the DOS
partition, but this isn't very clean.  The DOS on the hard disk was
"SYS"ed from the floppy that I am booting from.  By the way, if it makes
a difference, it is DOS 3.3.

Problem 2.  Occaionally, cu hangs on exit.  I don't know how cu works, but
apparently it runs with two processes.  Sometimes, after I give cu the ~.
command, cu hangs and when you do a ps -ef from another login session, you
can see that the second cu task is <defunct> and you have to kill off the
terminal session.

Problem 3.  When I exit from GNU Emacs 18.54 (yeah, I know its old), the
terminal session is logged out.  It doesn't matter whether ignoreeof is
set or not.

Thanks for any help that you can offer.

alan

Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: sandy@godzilla.quotron.com (Sanford Zelkovitz)
Subject: Re: DELL SVR4 - separate /usr and /var filesystem?
Keywords: dell svr4 filesystem
Organization: Quotron Systems, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 13:56:00 GMT

In article <BuH1Du.Bq9@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>bill@unixland.natick.ma.us (Bill Heiser) writes:
>
>>Yeah, but you get to PAY for it whether you want it or not!
>
>If you move to the state of Indiana, you have to pay state
>taxes whether you like it or not.  If you don't like it,
>move to a state where you don't have state taxes (like Florida)
>
>smile :)
>

Larry.... that rebuttle is below you.....
>-- 
>Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
>keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry

Sandy



-- 
Sanford <sandy> Zelkovitz            XBBS
Voice: (714)821-9670   Data and FAX: (714)821-9671
....uunet!pride386!alphacm!sandy
sandy@smftst.Quotron.com (130.224.26.12)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: jarmo@ksvltd.fi (Jarmo Raiha)
Subject: Re: CodeView
Organization: KSV Instruments LTD
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:01:54 GMT

dpwc@dprmpt.UUCP (Weihan Chang) writes:


>I am running SCO ODT 3.2 on my 486 and try to make CodeView work.
>I follow the man page giving "-g" to cc, but, cv keeps telling me
>no symbolic information. I can only see assembly codes.
>The man page also say that "ld" has "-g" option. When I try, "ld" 
>told me it doesn't know about this switch.
>Anyone can help me with this? Thanks !
===================================================

try cc -Zi -xenix <whatever.c>
 Jarmo Raiha
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: buick@belay (Patrick D. Buick)
Subject: Re: Tuning Parameter(s)
Keywords: Kernel
Organization: Belay Enterprises Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 06:18:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.155107.26837@rei.com> rick@rei.com (Richard J. Barton) writes:
>My Consensys SVR4 runs great and _v_e_r_y_ fast on my i486 with SCSI disk,
>BUT, when I compile large programs, it does an excellent job at devoting
>a vast majority of time to doing just that!  It pretty much inhibits doing
>anything else :-(.  While this is fine if that's all I want to do, great,
>but it's not.  Especially when I'm in X windows, by the time I enter the
><return> key, it's down several levels make files and compiling before
>my screen even shows it.  And going another Xterm is also very slow, as
>is the mouse movement.  I am using an Orchid Prodesigner II if this makes
>any differenct.  Don't they have an accelator chip for it, and if they do
>will this help and is it compatible?  I'm sure there is some simple
>solution for this...  Thanks in advance.
>
>-- 
>rick
>:-)
>rick@rei.com   [Plexus Software, A Division of Recognition Equipment Inc.]
>rick@panic.com [Personal]

Just "nice" it, if Consensys has that feature...

Patrick
-- 
==========================================================
Patrick D. Buick EMT, EET | Internet: buick%belay.uucp@uunet.uu.net
Belay Enterprises Inc.    | Internet: buickp@cuug.ab.ca
Calgary, Alberta, Canada  | UUCP:..keyword!calgary!pixel!belay!buick
From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: >16MB on a 486
Date: 15 Sep 92 23:42:03 GMT
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

maziere1@husc8.harvard.edu (David Mazieres) writes:

>In article <2669@aegis.or.jp> davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane) writes:
>>maziere1@husc8.harvard.edu (David Mazieres) writes:
>>
>>>The man page says of the 0/1 flag:
>>>     "0 indicates no special properties and 1 indicates memory for which
>>>      DMA is not allowed."
>>
>>If you would, what man page for what system? I don't see this of ISC 3.2. 

>OK sorry, I sort of cheated.  Actually that was the SVR4 man page.  However,
>I used to use a DELL SVR3.2 that said the same thing.  In fact, as I recall,
>the boot file had 16M-64M:1 by default.  I wondered what that meant and read
>the man page to find out, which is how I knew what it meant even before I
>went looking for an appropriate quote from the SVR4 man page.

Thanks for the update. 

>Here's another interesting point, though.  The Consensys V4 default is
>...1M-15M:0,16M-15M:1.  Is there some reason for disabling DMA in the last
>megabyte?

If anyone has a way to use 24MB with ISC R3.2 V3.0 I'd sure like
to know about it...

Dave

--
Dave McLane 
JUNET: davidg@aegis.or.jp (ONLY within Japan: post otherwise)
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch)
Subject: Re: DELL SVR4 - separate /usr and /var filesystem?
Organization: Somewhere just far enough out of Toronto
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 03:47:05 GMT
Keywords: dell svr4 filesystem

In article <BuEvwy.2rt@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

>>IF you want Merge. But why would I want Merge?

>If you want it, then just type dos.  If you don't, you get to
>delete it or remove it.

>At least you have a choice.

The real choice is whether to pay for it or not. If you know ahead of
time you'll never need it, being forced to buy and then de-install it
is not what I'd call a superior "choice".

The need for some people to run DOS programs under UNIX is still very
real, and is not likely to go away for some time. But technically
superior options, such as a separate MS-DOS server running Desqview/X,
and an increasing number of DOS software being ported to run native
under UNIX, make this option less necessary than it used to be.

Yes, I understand the economics of it. Dell (or any vendor) can get a
significant break from Locus if Merge is bundled with every copy of its
UNIX. That makes the price of the product lower than it might be for
those who want everything, but guarantees the total product will be more
expensive than it need be for those who *don't* want Merge.

Just as I don't want MS-DOS bundled into the hardware I buy (thus
increasing its cost) if I never plan to use it, I don't DOS bundled into
my UNIX. Sure that's what Locus would like -- guess why? -- but this is
a clear case of where unbundling is a feature, not a bug.

I can understand arguments of how LAN software and the development
system should not be unbundled, especially when they incrementally add
so little to the cost of the base product. But DOS emulation is clearly a
third-party adjunct that is not a part of the base package, and has no
business being wrapped into it.

-- 
 Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
   "This Used To Be My Playground" -- Madonna, singing about mens' washrooms
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.msdos
From: fr@compu.com (Fred Rump from home)
Subject: Re: MS Windows 3.1 via UNIX
Organization: CompuData Inc.
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 15:11:31 GMT

rlm@wyvern.twuug.com (Robert Mohrmann) writes:

>      My company department has a problem. We are currently running an
>internal software package that was designed to run under "MS Windows 2.1".
>The computers that we are running this on are 386 clones running
>SCO Unix v3.2 and the VPIX (DOS emulator).

The simplest and cheapest solution is to simply buy some more 386 boxes and 
put windows on them with your software. Then buy a copy of JSB Multiview for 
Windows and have each of these users do their normal windows thing while also 
having access to their favorite UNIX app in one or more windows on the dos 
box. Works great. The VP.ix thing was an abomination from day one - chuck it.

fred
-- 
W. Fred Rump 	office:	   fred@COMPU.COM     'mans feet have grown/so big 
26 Warren St.   home: fred@icdi10.compu.com  that he/forgets his littleness'
Beverly, NJ. 08010                          		Don Marquis 
609-386-6846    bang:uunet!cdin-1!icdi10!fr
From: fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: framemaker
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:27:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: ssc.1992Sep08.192704.2575
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

I would be interested in hearing from someone who has used Framemaker and
Ventura.  Although I am a UNIX person I use Ventura (on an MS-DOG system)
to do newsletters, advertising flyers and catalogs.  Let me explain why so
the comparison will make sense.

We use troff to do our products (pocket-sized books and reference cards)
because it is universal and we have our own macros to handle our strange
format.

For the others we do art in Corel Draw and put the whole thing together in
Ventura.  Ventura isn't really the right tool for one page flyers but most
of our work is much longer like our 32-page catalog.  The capability of
keeping source documents in their original form (ASCII files generally and
EPS for the art) is very important to us.  That means that we can update
documents on the source system (generally a UNIX system) and not have to
do significant work to layout the next version.  

I would like to more the complete solution over to a UNIX-based system.
Corel is available for UNIX platforms and Ventura is supposed to be
available for Suns with their 5.0 release (with no date as yet).  So, the
choice is to wait and get Ventura (which I am not 100% happy with) or
change gears now.  Suggestions are appreciated.
-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
>>> Publishers of pocket references for UNIX, C, VI, Emacs, Ksh, MS-DOS, ... <<<
     uunet!nwnexus!ssc!fyl or fyl@ssc.wa.com            (206)527-3385
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: merlyn9@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (michael.t.sedwick)
Subject: Re: >16MB on a 486
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 02:10:12 GMT

In article <2601@aegis.or.jp> davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane) writes:
>ed@maxed (Ed Whittemore) writes:
>
>>Simon Langley (slangley@constant.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>>: I have a 486 (ISA) with 20MB installed running ESIX 4.0.3.  When I boot,
>>: the machine recognises the full 20MB but ESIX only seems to recognise 16MB.
>>: 
>>: Does anyone know how to set things up to recognise all the memory?
>
>>THis is a complicated issue, but the answer is you don't.
>
>Oh my, I'm having the same problems with a 486 (ISA) with 24 MB
>installed running ISC 3.0. The ROM BIOS, Manifest, etc. recognize
>the full 24 MB but ISC only recognizes 16 MB. 
>
>I see options under konfig:memory size for up to 64 MB but according
>to the documentation this only affects the size of various buffers,
>etc.  and all available memory is used.
>
>I would like to understand the complications: can you/somebody supply
>details?
>


... you might want to check your SWAP partition "size"! 

THIS MUST BE ATLEAST AS LARGE AS THAT OF PHYSICAL MEMORY..

this has cause me problems in the past... & recamended ie 1/2 time memory size
especially if you are planning on running heavy X sessions!!!

			--michael

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Michael T. Sedwick                              NCR   [[AT&T Computer Systems]]
merlyn9@ihlpl.att.com                           Server Business Unit
Systems Administration;                         Naperville, Il.
Programming; User Pacification                  (708) 979-1026
(it's a h*ll of a job, but some has to do it)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: liuyu@acf3.nyu.edu (Yung I. Liu)
Subject: Looking for MAKE binaries for Interactive Unix V3.0
Organization: New York University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:34:09 GMT


Does anyone know where I cna get a copy of GNU Make (executeable,
not the source code) for Interactive Unix V3.0.

Any information will be appreciated.
From: hang@usc.edu (Paul Phuoc Han)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Help on Dell Unix Hardware Compatiblity
Date: 8 Sep 1992 13:49:36 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu


Hi netters,

Does anybody know which 486 (preferably 50MHZ EISA) motherboards and
EISA SCSI adapters work with DELL SVR4 Unix?

Thanks.
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: DELL SVR4 - separate /usr and /var filesystem?
Keywords: dell svr4 filesystem
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:42:48 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY


  I'm coming to the conclusion that unbundling of basic parts of UNIX is
the curse of the devil. It adds to the vendor's cost by having to
package the parts, it adds to the user's cost by having to buy all the
parts, it adds to the installation complexity, and generally adds enough
cost so that the saving in license fees, if any, are minimal.

  As far as support, I call SCO from time to time, and I always have to
know the revision level of every flaming part of the system, often a
combination SCO hasn't seen before (we had seven copies of Xenix text
processing, now running under ODT). We sometimes have Merge and VPIX on
the same machine. We then have to list every EFS and SLS and unnumbered
fix disk SCO has sent us, and convince the 1st line person that we
understand the problem even if they don't.

  With complete releases you give the rev number, and possibly a short
patch history, and that usually describes your environment. This has to
make support easier.

  While I'm on the topic, I wish SCO would give it's accounts a "brain
level" rating so admins who have been doing SCO stuff for a decade don't
get asked "is the big red switch on the right rear corer UP?" or told to
reseat the boards and call back. It usually wastes 10-30 minutes of
their time and ours getting them to believe we understand the problem,
and that drives everyone's costs up.

  Anyway, my vote is to bundle the essential parts of the system, the
kernal, C, net, ?roff, and X, so that people aren't building mix-n-match
software environments.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: jrh@mustang.dell.com (Randy Howard)
Subject: Re: perl 4.035 induces kernel panic in SVR4
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 14:52:54 GMT

maziere1@husc8.harvard.edu (David Mazieres) writes:

>I'm running Consensys SVR4.0.3.  Perl-4.035 compiled fine with the native
>cc (gcc gave problems).  When I do a "make test," however, it gets as far
>as comp/for and then the kernel panics.  I'm not even running it as root.
>Has anyone else seen anything like this?  The only changes I've made to my
>kernel were adding a slip driver and setting RSTCHOWN to 1.  Any advice/
>suggestions would be appreciated.

I have built perl 4.035 here on Dell SVR4, and with gcc I believe.  I 
suspect that you may not have answered the configure questions all correctly
or something *real* wierd is going on.  I can either send you my build tree
or take a look at yours if you like.  We ship perl in our public release,
but unfortunately, patch 35 came out literally about 8 hours after we sent
the tapes out from validation to the dupliocator.  :-(

>Thanks.
-- 
Randy Howard            _o	    @'s: jrh@dell.com
Dell Computer Corp.     \<,	    !'s: ...!uunet!dellunix!jrh
______________________()/ ()______________________________________________
"Univel"... Just Say "NoNIX"
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: ellis@nova.gmi.edu (Stew Ellis)
Subject: Re: What is the fastest 80x86 SVR4 X window hardware?
Organization: GMI Engineering&Management Institute, Flint, MI
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 00:09:09 GMT

evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

>In article <1992Sep9.153201.18582@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
>	dwex@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (david.e.wexelblat) writes:

>>In article <BuB644.GCw@gator.rn.com> larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
>>> jdc@tropix.uucp (Jim Cronin) writes:

>>A big piece of the puzzle is "do you want free X, with source?"

>Another piece is "do you need a commercial GUI"? I don't think XFree86
>comes with Motif or Open Look.

Open Look is precisely free, having been contributed to the X consortium by
Sun and AT&T several years ago.  The Xview stuff in standard X implements
many of the familiar clients.  Sun's proprietary stuff using Xnews is
properly called OpenWindows I believe.
There are some differences in the look, but not so much in the interface.

[Lots of stuff deleted]
>-- 
> Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software Ltd., located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario
>         evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!utzoo!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504
>   "This Used To Be My Playground" -- Madonna, singing about mens' washrooms

--
--                                                        ___________________
  R.Stewart(Stew) Ellis, Assoc.Prof., (Off)313-762-9765  /   _____  ______ 
  Humanities & Social Science,  GMI Eng.& Mgmt. Inst.   /        / /  /  / /
  Flint, MI 48504      ellis@nova.gmi.edu              /________/ /  /  / /
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
From: dlparker@dlpinc00.rn.com (David L. Parker)
Subject: Re: HOW WILL DOS BE HANDLED UNDER SVR4.2 ??
Keywords: DOS VP/ix?? merge??
Organization: Automated Data Management Services
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:39:37 GMT

In article <1754@rwing.UUCP> pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto) writes:

>nutshell, its a handy kludge.  If one has a conventional serial port
>(not a 'smart' multiport card with its own CPU), DOS based communications
>programs like Procomm, etc even work.  Even the 'smart' card assigned

So what fax software runs under VP/ix??  I can't get anything to work
(BLAST Fax PC, DOS Fax Pro, MX Fax...).  I'll probably come up with a 
reasonably priced UNIX-based package before I find one that'll run
under VP/ix.  That's what I'd prefer, of course, but it's not leaping
onto my system, and I haven't had any luck with NetFax or faxpak.
-- 
Dave Parker
Automated Data Management Services, Pleasant Hill, MO 64080-1331
(816) 987-5167/5218 voice/fax
From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: perl 4.035 induces kernel panic in SVR4
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:52:04 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Sep10.204557.15522@husc3.harvard.edu>, maziere1@husc8.harvard.edu (David Mazieres) writes:

| Thanks for all the help I've gotten.  In fact, my problem was simply that I
| was including libucb before libc.  I changed the library flags to -lc -lucb,
| and the new version tested fine.  When I posted I figured I'd probably messed
| up the flags somehow--the really disturbing thing is that a non-root user can
| bring the whole system down.  I know the ucb library has tons of bugs in it,
| but should even the most bizarely warped and misused system calls panic the
| kernel?  (i.e. not should as in is this a good thing, but should as in have
| other people been able to crash their SVR4 kernels reproducibly)

  I used to crash Dell regularly with a temp sensitive motherboard ;-)
Other than that I have never had a panic with Dell (or Intel, when I was
doing beta on that). It's been totally resistant to software causing
panics, one of the reasons I like it. I've never corrupted the
filesystems, either, no that I think of it.
-- 
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    I admit that when I was in school I wrote COBOL. But I didn't compile.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.windows.x,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.mach,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: steve@nuchat.sccsi.com (Steve Nuchia)
Subject: Re: Free software and the future of support for Diamond products
Keywords: Diamond, free-software
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.  Houston
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:05:55 GMT

In article <c3xn+a=.kwan@netcom.com> kwan@netcom.com (Kwan-Seng Low) writes:
>In article <1992Sep13.142036.26842@nuchat.sccsi.com> steve@nuchat.sccsi.com (Steve Nuchia) writes:
>>not buy undocumented hardware.  Vote with your wallet.

>I'm not sure what you really mean here, undocumented hardware. Any documented
>hardware would expose most of the vendor's proprietary design, at least the

Hogwash.  My beard has hardly any grey in it, and I have worked on
systems where every board and every peripheral came with a reasonably
thick manual.  These manuals used to have chapter titles like "theory
of operation" and "programming model".  Sometimes they had complete
schematics, more often just very good block diagrams.  Sample code too.

In the PC market you get a little bifold pamplet that tells you how
to take the lid off your computer without sticking any appendages
in the fan.  Grrrr.

>	If none of the vendor willing to reveal how to set clock on their s3
>based card, maybe us the users might consider design our own.
...
>in any large electronics shop (e.g. Fry's in Bay Area). Complete schematics,
>parts list, how to obtain it, complete doc. on how to build it, everything 
>available on public domain.
>	People has been selling hardware kit for some time, come to think about
>it, it's something that can be done. In this case, we just have a very narrow 
>focus; we want to build a public domain hardware design that's specifically

I've done that once for a serial board (though I do hold copyright on the
design files) and it works OK.  My serial board comes with schematics
and PAL equations, and is available as a kit or assembled.  The netlist
and Orcad files are available if somebody wants to customize it.

I think it would be very difficult to compete with the mass-produced
VGA cards.  If I was going to build a video card I would either shoot
for radical simplicty or build something that you could run the whole
X server on.

>	any response is welcome, just want to test this idea is making sense.
>It would eliminate the dependence on vendors when it come to writing display
>driver.

The idea makes sense technically, but not economically in my opinion.
-- 
Steve Nuchia      South Coast Computing Services, Inc.      (713) 661-3301
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386