HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tjones@willamette.edu (Tyler Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Locking a hard drive
Keywords: security
Date: 6 Apr 92 02:21:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: willamet.1992Apr6.022156.16517
Distribution: usa
Organization: Willamette University, Salem, OR

My school (a high school) is having nasty trouble with people messing around
with its hard drives.  Geeks with minimal knowledge of DOS get in and change
the Autoexec or Config, and even dumber people just put files (mainly games)
on the HDs and take up all the room.  In either case, I and the computer
administration would like to stop this from happening, so what I am asking is:
   Is there a way to "write protect" a hard drive?
Since it would be more than impossible to find a way to distinguish between a
file that does need to go on the HD and one that doesn't, our temporary
solution is to find a way to keep EVERYONE from putting ANYTHING on the hard
drives.  Because there may be times when it IS necessary to put something on
them, however, it must have a way around it, but as long as that method can be
kept away from the geeks in our computer lab, everything should be fine.  If
anyone can help us, it would be very appreciated.  Either a command or a
program, or whatever.  It would be nice if it would beep or give an error
message when a write to the HD is attempted, either to let people know that
they can't do it or to know that they need to make sure they save it to a
floppy disk instead.  The OS that we currently use is IBM DOS version 3.3 I
believe (it's either 3.1 or 3.3).  Thank you.
tjones@willamette.edu  FOR NORTH SALEM HIGH SCHOOL
From: jbreen@arghouse.UUCP (Magnum)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: BORLAND C++ 2.0 Piracy
Date: 6 Apr 92 01:01:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: arghouse.6cBsiB1w164w
Distribution: ca
Organization: The Listening Post


 >I'm curious to know how one goes about demonstrating probable cause
 >of copyright violations in order to obtain such a warrant. There's
 >got to be some significant (and expensive) detective work behind
 >it.

All it takes is a disgruntled former employee calling the SPA to bring on an 
investigation.


------------------
The Listening Post, San Diego, CA, USA  +1 619 563 1084
Opinions expressed are those of jbreen@arghouse.uucp.
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:3227 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:7592
From: price@helios.unl.edu (Chad  Price)
Subject: Re: Looking for Unix "Tar" for MSDOS
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: 17 Apr 92 15:07:23 GMT

douglaj@a.cs.okstate.edu (DOUGLAS JONATHAN S) writes:

>  Does anybody know where I can find the Unix "Tar" Program for msdos?


MKS Systems. 1-800-265-2797

(Along with most of the rest of the Unix utility and necessity programs)

chad
price@helios.unl.edu
From: eck@infopls.chi.il.us (John Eckert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: DOS 5 System Files?
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 20:27:41 CDT
Organization: INFOPLUS support, Wheeling, IL

     When I updated my DOS to version 5.0 (from 3.2) 
the OLD system files remained in their special places 
at the very beginning of the hard disk.  Dos 5.0 placed 
the NEW system files elsewhere on the disk.  
     
     Today I re-formatted that hard disk and decided to 
completely eliminate all vestiges of the old DOS 3.2 from 
the disk.  To my surprise, when I transferred the system 
files to make the hard disk bootable, DOS didn't install 
the new system files at the beginning of the disk.  Though 
the entire disk was empty, DOS chose to place all new 
system files in the middle of the disk again.
     
     What gives?
From: etl0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ERIC TODD LANDRIEU)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Question
Date: 12 Apr 92 04:57:18 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

>Can you do true multitasking of DOS boxes with OS/2?   Can I, for
>example, use Telix to download files in one window, unzip them at the
>msdos command line in another window, and run a newly aquired
>application in the third.
>
OS/2 does do true multitasking.  The only problem with what you have above,
though, is the way you would have Telix downloading a program and having it
UNZIPped simultanoeusly.  Two reasons why this probably would not work(no
matter what OS on what machine):
a)  The two are trying to access the same file, which is not read-only or
such.  When such situations occur, OSs, depending on how written, might not
let the second access be carried out until the first is complete.  This way,
there won't be two processes simultaneously changing the same piece of
data(imagine what havoc could be created if the two had opposing objectives...)
b)  Information needed in the second DOS session might not yet be available
from the first one.  Depending on how the zipping is done(what compression
program, etc.), you might need info which has not yet been received(for
example, maybe an AV code is put at the very end of the file or something).
In such a case, the DOS session would have nothing that it could do until the
download was completed anyway.
Also, considering how fast some decompression happens, even if this was not
the case, the second DOS session would almost certainly catch up to the first.
 What does it do now?  Because the sessions are protected from each other, the
 UNZIP program has no idea why the compressed file simply stops for no reason.
  It probably would stop with an error.
As for the third program in the background, that would be no problem
whatsoever.
                                  Eric Landrieu
Can't wait 'til my OS/2 arrives.
-- 

               ===============================================
               =   Eric Landrieu  =  ETL0@ns1.CC.lehigh.EDU  =
               ===============================================
"Of all the people I've ever met, you're certainly one of them."
                                                 -Ellis Fuls
From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Question
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:25:16 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Apr16.075734.11949@athena.mit.edu> wanderer@athena.mit.edu (Opus) writes:
>I think the minimum you need for os/2, *without* dos and windows support,
>is 15 megs.. if you want the dos and windows, it will take up 30... I
>wouldn't bother trying it on a 40 meg hard drive....

The minimum WITHOUT dos and windows support is actually 6-7 megs.  There
was a posting in comp.os.os2.misc about this, including the installation
of a minimum OS core.  This DID include WPS and PM and support for both
16-bit and 32-bit OS/2 programs.  Gee, about what DOS 5 uses...


john gay.                      jgay@digi.lonestar.org

OS/2 - opens the windows for a breath of fresh air.
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Question
Date: 12 Apr 92 15:08:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.38vjbnr.feustel
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

brent@cco.caltech.edu (Brent R. Eubanks) writes:

>I have a single question -- please post a reply here:

>Can you do true multitasking of DOS boxes with OS/2?   Can I, for
>example, use Telix to download files in one window, unzip them at the
>msdos command line in another window, and run a newly aquired
>application in the third.

This is easily done since disk files are available in all sessions.
If you are asking whether you can pipe from one session to another,
I would say no since syncronization between sessions is not built in
although it can be accomplished by using files as semaphores.
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
= Candidate Bush wouldn't recognize principle if he were standing upon it =
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 v2.0 - Not as great as I thought
Date: 12 Apr 92 15:13:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.88vj8wr.feustel
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

ujabanco@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (John Abanco) writes:

>Well here's my experience with the new OS/2 v2.0:

>"Great! I don't have to dish out $99 and I just upgraded my MB to a
>386-40". Found out I needed at least 4 MB of RAM.

I recommend 8 megs minimum and 16 meg if you can stand the cost.

>                                                   Okay, well 1MB is
>really scraping by, so I made the jump to 4 MB. Figured I would've paid
>around $100 for OS/2, I'm getting RAM for free.

>Installation day: Low-level format 30 Meg HD, Format with DOS 5.0. Break
>out the new OS/2 diskettes and start installing. Get through the first 5
>disks, tells me to take any disk out of the drive and hit ENTER. I do,
>starts booting OS/2, looks nice, then BAM! "Could not find COUNTRY.SYS
>in specified path", etc... "SYSTEM HALTED". Have to do a COLD boot, boot
>to DOS 5 to see what's up. The file is where it's supposed to be.

You have discovered the biggest problem with OS/2. Many strange errors
occur when os/2 has insufficient memory. These errors occur rarely
after installation is complete.
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
= Candidate Bush wouldn't recognize principle if he were standing upon it =
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: douglaj@a.cs.okstate.edu (DOUGLAS JONATHAN S)
Subject: Looking for Unix "Tar" for MSDOS
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 15:11:54 GMT

  Does anybody know where I can find the Unix "Tar" Program for msdos?




-- 
+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH+++ATH
+++ATH                   |                           |                  +++ATH
+++ATH Have you shot your| Lim   Engineering=Business| Oklahoma, Land of+++ATH
+++ATH modem today?      | GPA=0                     | tuition hikes.   +++ATH
From: doug@driver.aus.hp.com (Doug Parsons)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 00:15:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Binary file splitting.
Organization: HP Australasian Response Centre (Melbourne)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc

I get the same problem when I don't use the correct syntax for the restore-
or if I attempt to restore the files into a different location than stored.
You have to fully qualify the filenames - ie. dos\abc.txt instead of abc.txt.

doug.

Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:3085 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:7333
From: bobmon@sandshark.cs.indiana.edu (Bob Montante)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Help needed on NDOS and LIST
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:12:59 GMT
Organization: dyskaryotic

4DOS/NDOS includes a command that lets you set various options.  One of
those options is the ability to disable any of the builtin commands ---
I do this specifically for "list", because I also prefer Buerg's program.

Sorry I can't be specific on the syntax... the command is something like
"setdos" I think, and the option is something like "/I-list" to turn off
"list".  It's in the manual, at any rate.
From: sexonbd@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Benjamin David Sexson (Ben))
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Question
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:26:33 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

I have a question.  Does any one have any idea how OS/2 2.0 would
run on my 386sx/16?  I have resinged myself to gettig a new harddrive, 
but I only have 4megs, and can't expand any more without a card, of RAM.
I wonder if I could run it effectively.  Any help appriciated.

				later,Ben Sexson
				sexonbd@sage.cc.purdue.edu
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:3211 comp.os.msdos.programmer:5397
From: hank@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: GNU software of MSDOS ?
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:17:50 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Apr13.215156.4758@lia>, sgupta@lia (Suchin Gupta) writes:
> Is there any gnu software (e.g. emacs, gdb) available for msdos.
> I'm running a 386/33.  

A good place to start looking is 
---------------------------------------------------------------------> 
README file for the GNUish MSDOS project.
Copyright (C) 1990-1992 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Last updated: 92-03-02

This file is ftp'able as prep.ai.mit.edu:pub/gnu/MicrosPorts/MSDOS.
----------------------------------------------

This is mainly about the GNUish project (GNU software for 286 and up), but it
has some good pointers. You should also be aware of the emx port by the author
of emTeX, and the djgpp gcc compiler from Delorie. The doc above contains info
about finding djgpp.

--darrel hankerson hank@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: gold@ilp.mit.edu
Subject: Seeking scheduling software
Organization: MIT Industrial Liaison Program
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 05:38:09 GMT

I am interested in obtaining "scheduling" database software for a 
small community college.  The "scheduling" database is to be used to 
schedule classes for the college.  The database software must be 
MSDOS compatible.  It also must be able to help schedule daily 
classes by tracking:
                        Teacher Availability
                        Required Courses
                        Classroom Space Availibility
                        Groups of Students by
                            Graduation Date (we have
                            one group starting every
                            1-1/2 months -- nine/year)

Preferably, the database should be written in something like dbase or 
Paradox or some other popular PC database package, although we would 
look at others too.  We would like to either purchase the source code 
with the software or the software must allow some customization.

IF ANYONE KNOWS of any companies that sell scheduling databases for 
schools (or hospitals), PLEASE let me know the company's name and 
phone so I can contact them for more information.

Thank you inadvance for your assistance.
		 - Mark Gold
		GOLD@ILP.MIT.EDU
From: ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Microsoft (Was Re: Someone explain this to me...)
Date: 10 Apr 1992 18:46:11 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: alhena.usc.edu

jknepley@isis.cs.du.edu (Ranseus (Jim Knepley)) writes:
>I don't care to use either program (DR DOS 6.0 and DESQView for me), but I
>grow tired of the constant media attention that Microsoft gets over what
>are COMPLETELY SUPERIOR products.  There's a reason Mac users laugh at
>Windows, and it ain't the cute icons.  It was all the same with DR DOS,
>and people believed Microsoft.  Folks, the time for action has come.  Boycott
>Microsoft for the useless egomaniacs that they are (well, Bill Gates
>specifically).  Maybe they'll get the message...

Helped by good marketing and rampant stupidity, Microsoft
has convinced a lot of peasants that it is the ultimate provider
of software.  It will take a while getting them off this position.

E.g. "thinking people" shouted for years about IBM mainframes being
the pits, but look how long it took for the world to wake up.

Keep at it guys... that is all one can say.  Cross post on
comp.windows.ms, for that is where the darkness thrives.

        -ans.
-- 

Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@usc.edu
From: wanderer@athena.mit.edu (Opus)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Question
Date: 12 Apr 92 03:37:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1992Apr12.033759.8578
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

I can't figure out how to get this to quote, but the question was whether
OS/2 2.0 can truly multitask DOS boxes.. the answer is yes! it does it
better than windows (right now, I'm installing word for windows as
I type this).. I also have an os/2 box open, doing nothing, although it
could be running another program at the same time..

(I just got OS/2 2.0 today, and i really like it)

anyway, it does multitask, and i recommend getting it..
good luck!

Conroy Lee
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.misc:3075 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:7316
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
Subject: Re: Help needed on NDOS and LIST
From: mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor)
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 16:34:44 PDT
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu (Sean P. Ryan, Hardcore Alaskan) writes:

> Now, maybe I should RTFM here, but what workarounds can I pursue with
> this?  I was thinking of renaming LIST.COM to something else and using
> that name as the command to access the Buerg program, but are there any
> other things I can do?  I couldn't find anything that would allow me to
> disable the NDOS LIST, which is my preferred alternative.

Put this in your alias file:

list *c:\util\list (or whatever the directory is on your system)

The asterisk stops the alias loop which would result by aliasing
list (alias) to list (the program).
Should work the same for NDOS.

I also made an alias 'l' which calls list.com.  Easier to type.



[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
[] Long Beach, California
[] TNG Quote: "You were travelling in close formation at over 80,000 kph, only
[] 10 meters from Cadet Albert, and you didn't even know his orientation?!?"
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: Re: Anyone have this DOS5/emm386 prob?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1992 15:29:52 GMT

umalexa9@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Edward W. Alexander) writes:

>Brief overview:  Every so often i run into certain problems with DOS 5.0
>		I am running the DOSSHELL and the whole thing completely
>		locks up.  

Do you have the fixed version of DOSSWAP.EXE?  For MS-DOS systems, the
fixed copy of the file is dated 6-19-91.  I don't recall the exact
symptom list, but since it involves DOSSHELL you should make sure that
you've got it installed before spending too much time chasing down other
avenues.

Joe Morris
From: phuongn@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Phuong Ngoc Nguyen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Where to get a working model of Design Center (Pspice5.1)
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:12:15 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.


Hello, 
I would like to know where can I get a copy of the working model
Pspice 5.1 (Design Center). any FTP site? 

thanks,
phuongn@sail.labs.tek.com
From: einari@rhi.hi.is (Einar Indridason)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: want to disable ctrl-P key (MS-DOS 5 & $DOS 4.0)
Date: 5 Apr 92 13:19:19 GMT

In <a_rubin.701975082@dn66> a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:

>In <norbert.701693880@rwthi3> norbert@ikki.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Norbert Kiesel) writes:

>>Hello,
>>does anybody knows a way to stop ctrl-P from tyring to print?
>>I have no printer, so I always get an "A)bort...". What I really want
>>is to rebind ctrl-P to the previous-line command of 4DOS (same as UP).

>Well, you can stop it from trying to print by disableing INT 17 (printer). 
>(Actually, to be precise, make it return OK.) I don't think that will help
>you rebind ctrl-P, but that seems to be the best that can be done.  (If you
>hear otherwise, please let me and the FAQ maintainer know.)


I have somewhere a small TSR program (written by me :-) that turns off the
printer-echo flag 18 times per second.  I haven't noticed any degrade in
speed on my 386 machine.

This program should work with DOS 3.10 and greater, although I have only
tested it on my DOS 3.3 machine at home.


--
einari@rhi.hi.is
From: sci240s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Mr W.J. Ho)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 v2.0 - Not as great as I thought
Date: 13 Apr 92 06:55:10 GMT
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.

In <88vj8wr.feustel@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:

>ujabanco@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (John Abanco) writes:

>You have discovered the biggest problem with OS/2. Many strange errors
>occur when os/2 has insufficient memory. These errors occur rarely
>after installation is complete.

 Kinda like Windows 3.0 running with 1MB ram. You get enough UAEs to send you
back to running DOS. Then with 4 to 8 MB ram, I rarely get UAEs.

-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Wey Jing Ho    Tel: 61-3-573-2567   E-mail : sci240s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au<
>Physics Dept., Monash University ( Caulfield Campus ), Melbourne, AUSTRALIA<
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From: jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
Subject: Re: Norton + Superstore/Stacker: OK ??
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:37:15 GMT
Distribution: comp.os.msdos.misc
Organization: University of Helsinki

In <1992Apr8.191955.1170@uwovax.uwo.ca> heinicke@uwovax.uwo.ca (Allan Heinicke) writes:

>Is it safe to use (for example) Norton Utilities disk
>manipulating programs such as Norton Disk Doctor or Calibrate
>on a disk that has been compressed with Superstor (which is bundled
>with DR-DOS). I imagine (?) the answers for Superstor and Stacker 
>would be the same, but if there is a difference, it's Superstor I'm
>interested in.

With Stacker, definitely YES. I haven't used sstor, so I can't say about
that for sure, but should be.

-- 
_--__----__---___---___--____/ Juha Liukkonen - jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi \___/
_-___-____-___-_-___-___-___/ University  of Helsinki, Finland, Earth,  /o__o
_-___---__-___-_-___-___-__/ Department of Paranormal Investigations:  / (..)\
_--__-_____---___---___--_/ " 01000001 01001001  0100010  01010011 "   \  -- /
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Re: os/2
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 00:17:31 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

Marc.Costaldi@f2050.n391.z1.FidoNet.Org (Marc Costaldi) writes:

>Anyubody out there run os/2 on their home computer???? if so, would just 
>like to know if you like it, and what you think of it.. considering
>changing over,, want some input though,, thanks..

I'm running OS/2 v2.0 beta 6.304 on a 386/33 with 8meg ram. I probably
will never run msdos again. I have several devices for which I don't
yet have os/2 device drivers. I access these devices by starting a dos
session which actually runs a copy of msdos 5.0. Dos device drivers
for my Bernoulli boxes and my cdrom are loaded when the session starts.
I can access the Bernoullis and the cdrom with no problem. 

I also have an Adaptec 1542 scsi controller with one Conner drive
attached. That also works fine with os/2. Telix runs great in yet
another dos box.
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
= Candidate Bush wouldn't recognize principle if he were standing upon it =
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.misc