HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: g89r4222@alpha.ru.ac.za (Geoff Rehmet)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: Attempted summary (Was Re: UNIX on a PC clone)
Date: 27 Sep 92 16:38:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: alpha.g89r4222.717611928
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

In <19ntp1INN2qo@almaak.usc.edu> ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:

>This file is a attempt at a quick summary of the Unix options for
>386 boxes.  It is not monolithic or complete; it's supposed to be
>a quick first look at the field.  It is not a objective, factual
>summary; instead it reflects our biases and experiences.

>Destiny
>-------

>This is a SVR4.2 implementation by Univel, a company born of USL and
>Novell.  It's very slick -- e.g., it boots into a GUI.

Does anybody have any more detailed information about Destiny.  I would
like as much information as possible.  I have read a few articles about
it, but have not been able to get hold of any concrete information. 
(One article in "Handelsblatt" about June this year, but not much else.)

Any info would be appreciated.

Geoff.


--
==========================g89r4222@alpha.ru.ac.za=============================
 Geoff Rehmet              | The opinions expressed in this posting are my
 Computer Science Dept.    | own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
 Rhodes University         | or policies of Rhodes University, any department
From: micha@veeble.han.sub.org (Michael Zuelsdorff)
Subject: Re: SCO and Microsoft (Was: Re: Attempted summary (Was Re: UNIX on a PC clone))
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 00:11:23 GMT
Reply-To: micha@veeble.han.de (Michael Zuelsdorff)
Organization: veeble Hannover, Germany

>
>If you want to run applications that were written for SCO, why go to
>all the hassle of running SVR4?  If you need to do other things that
>require SVR4, then okay, but realize that it's not going to be as easy
>as running them on an SCO system.  But if all you need to do is run
>some applications that were written for SCO, then why use SVR4?  Why
>not just get SCO and forget it?
>
Oh please... tell us more 'bout these special SCO applications...

micha


Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: moose@guppy.tds.kth.se ((]ke Nordin))
Subject: Re: need help with tiny intallation disk for bsd386
Reply-To: moose@guppy.tds.kth.se ((]ke Nordin))
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:54:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.110646.26258@newstand.syr.edu>, kfoudil@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Foudil-Bey) writes:
|> I just retrieved the tiny installation disk  from agate.berkeley.edu
|> . I am supposed to insert the disk in drive a and reboot. My problem
|> is that my machine does not reboot from disk b and that's the only
|> 31/2 disk. How can I remediate to that problem?

Thats the standard behavior of recent ISA-bus machines (bioses), they try
the A: drive first and the C: drive second. Some bioses lets you reverse 
this in the CMOS setup memory.

The solution is to swap the floppy type settings in the CMOS setup, 
and to switch the drive's signal cables so that they change places 
with respect to the controller. That makes your 3.5" become A: If you
will run 386BSD then you will probably want to stay with that setup.

|> Other problem: Currently DOS manages all my disk space. If I want
|> to create a partition for Unix, do I have to reformat all of my disk
|> space or is there an easier way?

There certainly is, but ask in comp.unix.bsd, since almost all 386BSD
traffic goes there. (I dont know how, mind you 8^)

Wish U luck!

o
Ake 
________________________________________________________________________
\oAke Nordin                                  Internet: moose@tds.kth.se
Dept. of Telecom and Computer Systems (TDS)   Telephone: +46 8 790 78 99
The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)       Telefax  : +46 8  24 77 84
P.O. box 700 43,  S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden  PhoneHome: +46 8 717 47 16
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: int177c@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Jae Won)
Subject: Re: X fascination
Organization: Monash University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 13:15:34 GMT

In article <greg.717466874@saltydog> greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:
>In <KETIL.92Sep26001345@spurv.ii.uib.no> ketil@spurv.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde) writes:
>
>
>><Why to choose X>
>Now name a decent scanning package.  Name a decent image manipulation
                                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                       I have seen nothing like XV in either dos or macs.

Jae
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: ketil@spurv.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Ownership of files prevent Viruses
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of computer science at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<BCR.92Sep26113735@hpl3sn02.cern.ch>
	<1992Sep27.112655.3832@darwin.ntu.edu.au>
	<BURLEY.92Sep27193140@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 29 Sep 92 13:31:53

In article <BURLEY.92Sep27193140@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) writes:

   From: burley@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley)
   Date: 27 Sep 92 23:31:40 GMT
   [...]
   Think about it this way: given file protection added to MS-DOS, what
   percentage of DOS applications would have to have, as their installation
   instructions, something equivalent to "login as root, then ..."?  Given
   that the percentage is higher than, say, 5%, it is then very easy to
   convince users they have to login as root to install _your_ app.

Isn't this one of the reasons that almost all programs are installed
belonging to 'bin' and not 'root'?

   The problem to solve here is to have a system set up so that even unusual
   (demanding) apps require little or no special capabilities beyond what the
   user has, and when they do, are permitted only those capabilities (say,
   during install) that the user explicitly provides given the documentation.
   It's more complicated than this, of course, and there are other problems
   to deal with, but this is a big part of it.

Is it?  I (and other students without special privileges) have
installed lots of software here with little problems.  I don't see why
you should need to be root to install anything but system software...I
think.

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: lruppert@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Your worst nightmare...)
Subject: Re: Help! 386BSD and Linux (Was Re: Attempted Summary: UNIX on a PC clone)
Organization: Syracuse University
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 23:30:33 EDT

In article <1992Sep29.191515.3983@worldbank.org> sthomas@worldbank.org (Sidney F. Thomas) writes:
>
>Linux: System installed beautifully (all 15 disks downloaded

The command to invoke X is startx.  You may wish to edit /usr/lib/X11/Xconfig
though, your monitor and card might need special timings.
>
>
>Sidney Thomas
>

-Louis Ruppert
lruppert@mailbox.syr.edu
From: dak@kaa.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (David Kastrup)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: X fascination (was Re: Attempted summary (Was Re: UNIX on a PC clone))
Date: 26 Sep 92 09:17:22 GMT
Organization: Rechnerbetrieb Informatik  /  RWTH Aachen

hcp@csx.cciw.ca (H.C. Pulley) writes:


>I agree completely.  I don't understand this widespread fascination with X.  It
>is a huge piece of software demanding great CPU and disk resources.
Use the Gnu C-Compiler with optimizing. The source code of X contains many
hacks using Gnu assembler templates. This betters performance considerably.

But still it's a memory hog.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: bob@ht2.me.umn.edu (Bob Hain (Sysop))
Subject: Re: ieee-488 interface software
Keywords: ieee,488,interface,driver,unix
Organization: Dept. Mechanical Engineering, Univeristy of Minnesota 
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 00:08:05 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.175017.15454@swlvx2.msd.ray.com> shj@swl.msd.ray.com (STEPHEN JOYCE) writes:
>
>I'm looking for the IEEE-488 bus interface card for
>the PC unix compatible software driver. Does anyone
>know of a vendor that supplies one?
>  So far all I've found is that Hewlett-Packard
>makes a card/driver combination but it just
>runs under MS-DOS and not a Unix PC.
You did not say what flavor of Unix you are using but National
Instrumnet of Austin Tx supplies card and drivers for some Unix
systems.  The have a wonderful C-language interface to the card.
I highly recommend their products - they know IEEE and they know
Unix (although their salsmen may not know Unix - be a bit
persistant)


National Instruments	1-800-531-GPIB	1-800-531-4742
			1-800-IEEE-488	1-800-433-3488	(new)
			(512) 794-5405  Bulletin Board
			6504 Bridge Point Parkway	Austin, Tx. 78730-5039


Have to go.... the boss just walked in.

--------------------------
 
INET:  bob@ht2.me.umn.edu    FAX: (612) 624-1398
VOICE: (612) 625-5559
 
Bob Hain                   |                   |
University of Minnesota    |_____      ____    |_____
Dept. of Mech. Eng.        |     \   //.~~.\\  |     \
111 Church St. S.E.        |      | ((  /\  )) |      |
Minneapolis, Mn 55455      |_____/  ) \_--_/ ( |_____/
                                    (        )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: UNIX on a PC clone
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:41:33 GMT

In article <DAVIS.92Sep23222211@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu> davis@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu  (John E. Davis) writes:
> What does this mean?  Does it mean that I can put command.com somewhere in the
> path, do rehash; command.com and get a DOS shell?

You put a link to the dos emulator in the same directory as command.com,
with the name command, do "rehash; command", and get a DOS shell.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                               `-_-'
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp.                                    'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012
+1 713 274 5180                                   Har du kramat din varg idag?
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: UNIX on a PC clone
From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Organization: The Man With Ten Cats
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 06:23:53 GMT
Reply-To: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly)
Keywords: Linux, Coherent, comparisons, *_OPINIONS_* ;^)

In article <1406@pacsoft.com> mike@pacsoft.com (Mike Stefanik) writes:
>In an article, keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith) writes:
>>[...] MWC did not get it's start in writing unix clones. They wrote
>>lots of other reasonably priced stuff like 'C' compilers, and such [...]
>>Coherent to x86 port was kinda was a "keen idea", that developed a lot
>>more interest than they expected. [...] I think it has only been recently
>>that MWC has really begun to push Coherent on PC platforms. 
>
>        "Several other companies sell UNIX-like operating systems
>        for the Personal Computer. The Mark Williams Company in
>        Chicago, Illinois, for example, sells Coherent." [...]
>
>        From the book "IBM's Personal Computer" by Que. Copyright 1983.
>
>So this question is valid:
>"If they have been hacking on UNIX-like kernels for the past 10 years or so,
>why is it that in 1992 they *just* came to market with a 32-bit flavor which
>still lacks virtual memory, networking and other essentials?"

Because they sold the rights to Coherent to another company for a few years,
and then bought them back around 1988 or 1989.  Coherent has run on the 80x86,
680x0, Z8001, and PDP11.

>I would guess that they *chose* not to for non-technical reasons; since
>the folks who produced Linux (and other freely available software) are
>not bound by marketeers and accountants, they can be considerably more
>nimble in terms of getting "product" out the door.  But keep in mind that
>writing the code is only half the job ... and that other half is where a
>significant portion of the cost of bringing a product to market lies.

MWC has code in hand for virtual memory, TCP/IP, and a bunch of other 
stuff that will be available for 4.1.

>Ultimately I believe that comparing Linux to Coherent is akin to comparing
>apples to oranges -- both have a place in the world, and are designed to
>attract and serve the needs of different kinds of people.

Coherent is attempting to follow industry standards, while Linux is setting
it's own standards.

-- 

Rick Kelly	rmk@rmkhome.UUCP	unixland!rmkhome!rmk	rmk@frog.UUCP
From: ravn@imada.ou.dk (Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: X fascination
Date: 29 Sep 92 14:55:13 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Math. & Computer Science, Odense University, Denmark

ketil@svale.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde) writes:


>   Display Postscript is not a window system.  8.5 is not available.
>   NeWS is dead.

>I've run OpenWindows on a sun here.  Now, I'm not much into these
>matters, but it's supposedly superior to X.  To tell you the truth, I
>couldn't tell any difference.  Apart from the startup logo... :-)

Well, OpenWindows is supposedly a merge of NeWS, X, and SunView.  This
makes OpenWindows an even greater ressource hog, than X by itself.  It
runs great, however, on our 24Mb color Sparc stations.  On a 8Mb Sun 3,
it is a pain.

At least OpenWindows has a good PostScript viewer as standard (Yes, I
know of GhostView), but *that* is a NeWS application.  Does this mean
that NeWS lives somewhere -- that is, any new applications?


>   imake?  As in "xmkmf; make; make install"?  I have found X11R5 and X11
>   aplications with Imakefiles to be the free software most easy to
>   install.

True, true, true!  Yet another standard way of doing things.  Imake is
bad, but the above sequence is very nice (when the Imakefile writer
knows what s/he is doing).

-- 
Thorbj{\o}rn Andersen |  b="a=\"b=\"++show b++';':b";a="b="++show b++';':b
ravn@imada.ou.dk      |  Graph Theory:  Building trees out of bridges.
 
                       
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: gallatin@altair.cs.rpi.edu (Andrew Gallatin)
Subject: Many questions..
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:15:34 GMT

Hi,

I'm wondering what sort of configuration (processor, ram & disk
space)for a pc would be recommended to run the following:

	linux
	emacs
	gcc (& is g++ available?)
	X windows (with include files & libs, not just server..)
	TeX & xdvi
	
Would something like a 486-DX w/4M ram  & 100M hd provide enough power
and storage space?

Also, does X on pc's support monochrome displays?  Are there any SVGA
monochrome cards/monitors out there?


Thanks,

-- 
   "Early to bed, early to rise, makes a man sleepy and bleary in the eyes"

        Andrew Gallatin                         gallatin@cs.rpi.edu
From: pauls@css.itd.umich.edu (Paul Southworth)
Subject: Re: UNIX on a PC clone
Organization: University of Michigan ITD Consulting and Support Services
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:21:05 GMT

In article <9210010028.47@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>Coherent is a better choice for someone who doesn't want to recompile the
>kernel, the compiler, and every command in the system once a week.

Pshaw.  This is a ridiculous exaggeration and simply not true.

Paul Southworth                    |     ftp redspread.css.itd.umich.edu
Consulting and Support Services    |        Anonymous Political Archives
Information Technology Division    |                     100% 386BSD 0.1
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor  |  Coming soon: mirror of ftp.eff.org

  <Representing myself.  Everything I say is for educational use only.>
From: jack@admin.mport.COM (Jack Craig)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: DOS and Unix on one disk?
Date: 28 Sep 92 20:11:09 GMT
Organization: Microport Inc., Scotts Valley, CA 95066 US of A

added just for variety,

i have 2 disks on my home system. one esdi(came with the box)
and one scsi(large).
my esdi disk has dos 3.3 and sco unix, bootable as described earlier.
my scsi disk has dos 5.0 and microport unix.

i toggle between disks by doing cmos update of disk table.
say C: present, bot sco disk, say no and boot scsi disk/svr4.

this is just so you'll know how crazy some of us can get! ;)

jack...
=============================================================================
 Jack Craig  Microport         SVR4 408-438-UNIX   uunet!mport.com!jack
             Software Horizons SVR3 408-684-1375   uunet!sco.com!blznrzn!jack
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Unix on a 486/50
From: coxon@chem.canterbury.ac.nz (Edward Coxon)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 05:56:05 GMT
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Anyone got the best unix system on the whole planet that will run on a 486
i.e _FREE_

e.coxon
From: hcrms@usmi03.midland.chevron.com (Mitchell S. Craig)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: X fascination
Date: 1 Oct 92 06:31:30 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <BvBxwF.7Au@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>>>>- (challenge for list of decent X software deleted)
>>
>>Okay, here is a partial list of FREE Xwindows programs 
A
A
>>or programs that support Xwindows :
>>
>>- xarchie (archie client)
>>- xgraph (a graph program)
>>- xplayer (to play sound)
>>- ftptool and xftp (ftp program)
>
>Yeah, and *thank* *God* for these programs, huh?  Boy, I don't know
>how my life would have been had I not had xarchie handy ...
>
Don't forget xroach!

Seriously, though, X is nice because it provides the basic
building blocks in C-callable form. Finally I can work
on graphics code with the security of knowing that if
I go to work somewhere else in the next year or two
I will probably be able to use my programs on their
hardware too.

My only bitch is that I have to write a separate set
of Postscript routines in order to get decent
hardcopy. I miss the old Tektronix 4xxx routines -
the same graphics file could be sent to either the
screen or the plotter.

Mitch Craig - hcrms@crinoid.chvpkh.chevron.com
From: sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: X fascination (was Re: Attempted summary (Was Re: UNIX on a PC clone))
Date: 28 Sep 92 13:05:35 GMT
	<id.3RIT.P5A@ferranti.com> <1992Sep24.195925.23312@csx.cciw.ca>
	<dak.717499042@kaa> <pdhatchm.717595194@syzygy>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

}} In article <pdhatchm.717595194@syzygy> pdhatchm@socs.uts.edu.au (Paul Hatchman) writes:
}} 
}} I run X on a 486-50. The server rarely uses up more than 10% of CPU time.
}} (Usually about 5%). The server is using less than 2MB at the moment and has 
}} been running most of the day.

From top (under SunOS):
  183 sjc        1    0  7876K 2108K sleep  82:13  0.39%  0.39% Xsun

Note that my X server has a 7876k size, with over 2 meg resident.
Now, X is fine if you reboot every day, and don't run a lot of
different programs.  But if you don't kill the server regularly, it's
a memory hog (not quite up there with gnu emacs, but close).

sjc@cs.purdue.edu               Steve Chapin           Today's Grammar Lesson:
       "If you loose your arrow, you're likely to lose it in the weeds,"
                       was often heard in days of yore.

               Help stamp out variable length protocol headers!
From: 5916rahmank@vms.csd.mu.edu (K. M. A. Rahman)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Where can I get 'extract' utility from?
Date: 2 Oct 1992 00:03:40 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: 5916rahmank@vms.csd.mu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: vmsd.csd.mu.edu

Hi all, I have downloaded the bin files from a ftp site. But can't extract
the files fom the bin01.?? distribution files. How do I extract them?
Thank you for help.
-Anis
From: vojta@lhasa.berkeley.edu (Paul Vojta)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: vi on a PC
Date: 30 Sep 1992 01:10:13 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: lhasa.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Sep29.152134.9229@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
>In <1992Sep28.180644.8751@parc.xerox.com> fishkin@parc.xerox.com (Ken Fishkin) writes:
>:Thanks to the many people who helped me find versions of "vi"
>:which run on a PC running DOS. I also received a number of requests
>:asking me to share the answers, which were:
>:    1) "Elvis", available from wuarchive.wustl.edu under 
>:/mirrors/mdsos/editor, or oak.oakland.edu under pub/msdos/editor
>:    2) "Calvin", available from oak.oakland.edu under pub/msdos/editor
>:    3) "pc-vi", available from plains.nodak.edu under /pub/pc/editors
>:    4) MKS toolkit, commerically available for around $100.

I probably should point out that pc-vi is an earlier version of calvin.
Use it only if you want something really small.

It is really called Free vi, and is unrelated to the commercial "pc-vi"
which was sold many years ago until AT&T found out that it was compiled
from their source code.

--Paul Vojta, vojta@math.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: pnevmati@milhouse.cs.wisc.edu (Dionisios N. Pnevmatikatos)
Subject: Re: X fascination (was Re: Attempted summary (Was Re: UNIX on a PC clone))
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:22:09 GMT

sjc@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Chapin) writes:

>}} In article <pdhatchm.717595194@syzygy> pdhatchm@socs.uts.edu.au (Paul Hatchman) writes:
>}} 
>}} I run X on a 486-50. The server rarely uses up more than 10% of CPU time.
>}} (Usually about 5%). The server is using less than 2MB at the moment and has 
>}} been running most of the day.

>From top (under SunOS):
>  183 sjc        1    0  7876K 2108K sleep  82:13  0.39%  0.39% Xsun

>Note that my X server has a 7876k size, with over 2 meg resident.
>Now, X is fine if you reboot every day, and don't run a lot of
>different programs.  But if you don't kill the server regularly, it's
>a memory hog (not quite up there with gnu emacs, but close).

Here is my server on a Black and White DECstation 3100. Agreed, if you
run a lot of stuff with bitmaps pixmaps and so on, it will grow. But
depending on the version of the patches it will, or it will not grow as
time does by (they actually free space, believe it or not!).

  213 root       1    0  3668K  472K sleep  22:19  0.39%  0.39% Xdec

BTW, what is the ratio of code space for 486 vs RISC programs? This could 
account for quite a bit of the difference.

>sjc@cs.purdue.edu               Steve Chapin

Dionisis Pnevmatikatos
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
From: jwinstea@fenris.claremont.edu (Jim Winstead Jr.)
Subject: Re: UNIX on a PC clone
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, WIBSTR
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:56:40 GMT

In article <9210010028.47@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
>Coherent is a better choice for someone who doesn't want to recompile the
>kernel, the compiler, and every command in the system once a week.

You don't have to do that if you want to use Linux.  You could safely
get the latest MCC release (based on the 0.97pl2 kernel, gcc 2.2.2d
and the 2.1 jumptable libraries) and have a system that would work
consistently over the next zillion years or so.

You wouldn't get all the latest whiz-bang features, but you would get
relative stability.

>I like Linux, and if I had a spare PC that I wasn't using, I would have it
>up and running here.  I've fooled with it on other systems, like it, but
>realize that it is not at the state where it can be relied upon to be up
>24 hours a day.

I'll agree there - Linux is not stable enough to be used in a
commercial environment, IMHO, although some people are doing so.
-- 
                                    +      Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95)
                                    |      Harvey Mudd College, WIBSTR
                                    |   jwinstea@jarthur.Claremont.EDU
                                    + or jwinstea@fenris.Claremont.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit
Subject: Re: UNIX on a PC clone